^v\st*'t^ 


^  tut  W».tMmt  ^^^. 


^% 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


% 


Shelf 


Division  ^^^Idw!D 
Section      « .  wT  (o  LoLo 
Number >/*...Cl.. 


THE 

EPISTLE  TO  THE  ROMANS 


II. 


A 

Series  of  Simple  Expositions 

of 

Portions  of  the  New  Testament 

BY  THE 

REV.    CHARLES   GORE. 

THE 

SERMON   ON    THE   MOUNT.                                1 

Crown  Svo. 

THE 

EPISTLE   TO   THE   EPHESIANS. 

Crown  Svo. 

THE 

EPISTLE  TO  THE  ROMANS.     In  Two  Vols. 

Crown  'ivo. 

In  Contemplation. 

THE 

EPISTLES   OF   ST.  JOHN. 

5"/.  Paul's 

Epistle  to  the  Romans 

A  Practical  Exposition  . 

y 

By  CHARLES   GORE,    M.A.,   D.D. 

OF  THE   COMMUNITY  OF  THE   RESURRECTION 

CANON  OF  WESTMINSTER 

HON.  CHAPLAIN  TO  THE  QUEEN 


VOL.  II 
(CHAPTERS  IX-XVI) 


NEW   YORK 

CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S    SONS 

153-157,  Fifth  Avenue 

1900 


0;cfor5 

HORACE   HART,    PRINTER   TO   THE   UNIVERSITY 


PREFACE 


There  would  be  no  need  for  a  preface  to 
this  second  volume  were  it  not  that  a  very 
kindly  and  careful  review  of  the  first  volume  in 
The  Guardian  of  May  24  last,  requires  a  word 
of  notice.  The  reviewer  warns  me  off  *  the  dia- 
logue system  of  exegesis/  Now  no  doubt  this 
principle,  like  every  other,  may  be  abused. 
*  The  Jewish  objector '  may,  as  the  reviewer 
complains,  be  allowed  to  '  run  riot.'  Still  I  can- 
not doubt  that  the  Jewish  objector  is  a  reahty 
of  an  illuminative  kind  in  the  argument  of  such 
passages  as  Romans  iii.  1-8,  or  the  great  passage 
(ix-xi),  to  which  the  first  part  of  this  volume  is 
devoted.  Of  the  other  points  of  detail  noticed 
by  the  reviewer — which  a  volume  of  this  kind  is 
not  the  place  to  discuss — many  are  confessedly 
doubtful,  and  some  unimportant.     On  most  of 


vi  Preface 

them  I  am  still  disposed  to  retain  my  former 
opinion,  but  I  would,  in  accordance  with  my 
critic's  wishes,  alter  '  the  actual  life '  (vol.  i. 
p.  203)  into  '  the  principle  of  life,'  and  (p.  213) 
instead  of  saying  that  the  principle  of  living 
by  dying  '  belongs  only  to  a  fallen  world  *  say 
that  *  it  belongs,  as  St.  Paul  views  it,  though 
probably  not  in  its  ultimate  law,  to  a  fallen  world.' 
I  agree  that  in  its  deepest  sense  the  principle 
appears  to  be  an  ultimate  law  of  all  created  life 
of  which  the  conditions  are  known  to  us. 

C.  G. 

Westminster  Abbey, 

Conversion  of  St.  Paul,  1900. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  ROMANS. 


CHAPTER 

IX.        1-13     §  I 


14-29       §  2 


Division  IV    77?^  theodicy  or  justification  0/  God  for  His 
dealings  with  the  Jems   .... 

The   present   rejection    of    Israelites    no 
breach  of  a  divine  promise 

God's  liberty  in  showing  mercy  and  judge- 
ment always  retained  and  asserted 
30-x.  21     §  3     Lack  of  faith  the  reason  of  Israel's  rejection 

XI.  1-12     §  4     God's  judgement  on   Israel   neither  uni- 

versal nor  final 

13-36  §  5  God's  present  purpose  for  the  Jews 
through  the  Gentiles  :  and  so  for  all 
humanity        .... 

Division  V    Practical  exhotiation  . 

XII.  1-2     §  I     Self-surrender  in  response  to  God 
3-21     §  2     The  community  spirit 

XIII.  1-7     §  3     The  Christians  and  the  imperial  pow^ 
8-10     §  4     The  summary  debt    . 

11-14     §5     The  approach  of  the  day  . 

XIV.  1-23     §  6     Mutual  toleration 

XV.  1-13     §  7     Unselfish  forbearance  and  inclusiveness 


14 

31 

44 

59 

68 

95 
97 
103 
116 
127 
133 
137 
159 


Vlll 


Contents 


Division  VI    Conclusion 

XV.  14-33     §  I     St.  Paul's  excuse  for  writing,  and  his 

of  coming 

XVI.  1-2     §  2     A  commendation 
3-16     §  3     Personal  greetings     . 

17-20     §  4     Final  warning  . 

21-23     §  5     Salutations  from  companions 


25-27     §  6     Final  doxology  , 


hope 


PAGE 
170 

171 

189 
191 
198 
200 
201 


APPENDED  NOTES:— 

A.  The  meanings  of  the  word  *  faith  '      .        ,         .         .  205 

B.  The  use  of  the  word  '  conscience  '      .         .         .         .  207 

C.  Recent  reactions  from  the  teaching  about  hell   .         .210 

D.  Difficulties  about  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement .         .  215 

E.  Evolution  and  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Fall        .  219 

F.  Baptism  by  immersion  and  by  affusion       .         .         ,  237 

G.  A  prayer  of  Jeremy  Taylor 238 

H.     The  origin  of  the  maxim  '  In  necessariis  unitas,  &c.'  239 
I.      St.  Augustine's  teaching  that  'The  Church  is  the 

body  of  Christ  offered  in  the  eucharist '       .         .  240 


THE 
EPISTLE   TO   THE    ROMANS 


DIVISION  IV.    Chapters  IX-XI. 

The  theodicy  or  justification  of  God  for  His 
dealings  with  the  fezvs. 

St.  Paul  has  concluded  his  great  exposition 
of  the  meaning  of  '  the  gospel  * :  that  in  it  is 
the  disclosure  of  a  divine  righteousness  into 
which  all  mankind — Jews  and  Gentiles  on  the 
same  level  of  need  and  sin — are  to  be  freely 
admitted  by  simply  believing  in  Jesus.  The 
believer  in  Jesus  first  welcomes  the  absolute 
and  unmerited  forgiveness  of  his  sins,  which  his 
redeemer  has  won  for  him,  and  thus  acquitted 
passes  into  the  spiritual  strength  and  joy  and 
fellowship  of  the  new  life,  the  life  of  the 
redeemed  humanity,  lived  in  Jesus  Christ,  the 
second  Adam  or  head  of  our  race.    The  contem- 


2  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

plation  of  the  present  moral  freedom,  and  the 
glorious  future  prospect,  of  this  catholic  body — 
the  elect  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ— has  in  the 
eighth  chapter  filled  the  apostle's  language  with 
the  glow  of  an  enthusiasm  almost  unparalleled 
in  all  the  compass  of  his  epistles.  And  he  is 
intending  to  pass  on  to  interpret  to  the  repre- 
sentatives of  this  church  of  Christ  at  Rome 
some  of  the  moral  obligations  which  follow 
most  clearly  from  the  consideration  of  what 
their  faith  really  means.  This  ethical  divisior^^/ 
of  the  epistle  begins  with  chapter  xii.  The 
interval  (ix-xi)  is  occupied  with  a  discussion 
which  is  an  episode,  m  the  sense  that  the  epistle 
might  be  read  without  it  and  no  feehng  of 
a  broken  unity  would  force  itself  upon  us. 
None  the  less  the  discussion  not  only  confronts 
and  silences  an  obvious  objection  to  St.  Paul's 
teaching,  but  also  brings  out  ideas  about  the 
meaning  of  the  divine  election,  and  the  responsi- 
bility involved  in  it,  which  are  vital  and  neces- 
sary for  the  true  understanding  of  the  'free 
grace  of  God.'  For  these  chapters  serve  really 
to  safeguard  the  all-important  sense  of  our 
human  responsibility  under  the  rich  and  un- 
merited conditions  of  divine  privilege  in  which 
we  find  ourselves. 


Sf,  Paul's  ^ theodicy^ 


St.  Paul's  argument  so  far  has  involved  an 
obvious  conclusion.  God's  elect  are  no  longer 
the  Jews  in  particular.  On  the  contrary,  the 
Jews  in  bulk  have  lost  their  position  and  become 
apostates  in  rejecting  the  Christ.  This  result 
in  the  first  place  cuts  St.  Paul  to  the  heart,  for 
his  religious  patriotism  was  peculiarly  intense. 
But  in  the  second  place  it  furnishes  an  objec- 
tion in  the  mouth  of  the  Jew  against  St.  Paul's 
whole  message.  For  if  God  had  really  rejected 
His  chosen  people,  He  had  broken  His  word  in 
so  doing.  God  had  pledged  Himself  to  Israel : 
the  Old  Testament  scriptures  were  full  of 
passages  which  might  be  quoted  to  this  effect. 
Thus  : — 

*  My  mercy  will  I  not  utterly  take  from  David 

'  Nor  suffer  my  faithfulness  to  fail. 
'  My  covenant  will  I  not  break, 

*  Nor  alter  the  thing  that  is  gone  out  of  my  lips. 

*  Once  have  I  sworn  by  my  holiness  ; 

'  I  will  not  lie  unto  David  ; 
'  His  seed  shall  endure  for  ever, 

'  And  his  throne  as  the  sun  before  me. 
'  It  shall  be  established  for  ever  as  the  moon, 

*  And  as  the  faithful  witness  in  the  sky  ^' 

But  according  to  St.  Paul's  teaching,  had  not 
God  'broken  His  covenant'?    What  had  be- 

^  Ps.  Ixxxix.  33-7. 
B  2 


4  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

come  of  the  'faithful  witness'?  To  this 
objection,  then,  St.  Paul  sets  himself  to  reply. 
The  chapters  we  are  now  to  consider  may  be 
best  represented  as  an  animated  defence  of  his 
teaching  directed  toward  a  Jew  who  pleads  this 
objection.  St.  Paul,  no  doubt,  had  heard  too 
much  of  it  since  he  began  to  preach  the  gospel, 
and  had  felt  it  too  deeply  in  his  own  mind  in  the 
earlier  days,  when  the  word  of  Jesus  was  as  a 
goad  against  which  he  was  kicking,  for  it  to  be 
possible  for  him  to  pass  it  by.  And  his  defence 
— his  'theodicy'  or  justification  of  God — is  in 
brief  this :  God  never  committed  Himself  or 
tied  Himself  to  Israel  physically  understood. 
He  always  kept  hanging  over  their  heads 
declarations  of  His  own  freedom  in  choosing 
His  instruments,  and  warnings  of  possible 
rejection,  such  as  ought  to  have  prevented  their 
resting  satisfied  with  merely  having  'Abraham  to 
their  father '  (ix).  And  if  the  question  be  asked  : 
Why  has  Israel  been  rejected?  The  answer 
is :  That  so  far  as  actual  Israel  has  fallen  out  of 
the  elect  body,  it  is  because  they  refused  to 
exhibit  the  correspondence  of  faith  (x) ;  but  also 
Israel,  as  such,  has  not  been  rejected ;  for,  as  of 
old,  so  now  there  is  a  faithful  remnant.  Nor 
again  is  the   partial  alienation  of  Israel  which 


SL  Paul's  ^theodicy' 


has  occurred  final.  God  is  simply  waiting  for 
their  recovery  of  faith,  to  restore  them  to  their 
ancient  and  inalienable  position  of  election. 
Meanwhile  He  uses  their  temporary  alienation 
as  the  opportunity  of  the  Gentiles,  who  in  their 
turn  can  only  retain  their  newly  won  position 
by  maintaining  the  correspondence  of  faith  with 
the  purposes  of  God,  and  who  also  wait  for  their 
fulfilment  and  the  perfecting  of  their  joy  upon 
the  recovery  of  Israel  as  a  body.  Thus  through 
all  stages  of  election  and  rejection — by  both 
methods  of  mercy  and  of  judgement— God,  in 
His  inscrutable  wisdom,  works  steadily  for  the 
opportunity  of  showing  His  mercy  upon  all 
men. 

When  we  have  a  brief  analysis  of  the  argu- 
ment of  these  chapters  under  our  eyes,  we  may 
well  rub  them  in  astonishment,  and  look  again, 
and  ask  why,  in  the  reaction  against  Calvin- 
ism \  we  had  come  (to  put  it  frankly)  to  dislike 
these  chapters  so  much.  We  know  that  as 
a  fact  these  chapters  have  been  taken  as  a 
stronghold  of  the  Calvinistic  position  by  both  its 

^  By  this  phrase  is  commonly  meant  the  doctrine  that  God 
created  some  men  absohitely  and  irresistibly  predestined  to  eternal 
life  and  joy,  and  created  the  rest  of  mankind  absolutely  and  hope- 
lessly abandoned  to  eternal  misery. 


6  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

friends  and  foes.  They  have  come  to  constitute 
in  modern  literature  a  sort  of  reproach  upon 
Christianity  \  just  on  the  ground  on  which 
the  best  Christian  conscience  of  our  time  is 
most  sensitive.  Many  of  us  would  have  to 
admit  that  we  have  shrunk  from  these  chapters 
as  we  have  heard  them  read,  and  probably 
avoided  them  in  our  own  reading.  We  have 
shrunk  from  the  sound  of  the  words— 'the  chil- 
dren being  not  yet  born,  neither  having  done 
anything  good  or  bad,  that  the  purpose  of  God 
according  to  election  might  stand,  not  of  works 
but  of  him  that  calleth' — '  Jacob  have  I  loved,  and 
Esau  have  I  hated ' — '  Whom  he  will  he  har- 
deneth ' — '  Hath  not  the  potter  power  over  the 
clay.'  Yet  these  texts,  with  their  arbitrary,  unfair 
and  narrow  sound,  appear  as  steps  in  an  argument 
which  has  for  its  conclusion  the  most  universal 
conception  possible  of  the  purpose  of  the  divine 
love.  '  God  shut  up  all  unto  disobedience,  that 
he  might  have  mercy  upon  all.'  The  conclusion 
of  the  argument  is  so  unmistakable,  and  so  plain 
against  any  Calvinistic  attribution   to   God  of 

1  Matthew  Arnold,  St.  Paul  and  Protestantism  (Smith,  Elder, 
1870),  p.  99,  admits  that  St.  Paul  *  falls  into  Calvinism,'  but 
patronizingly  excuses  him  on  the  ground  that  this  Calvinism  is 
with  him  secondary,  or  even  less  than  secondary. 


SL  Paul's  ^theodicy' 


a  narrow  and  arbitrary  favouritism,  that  there 
must  have  been  some  great  mistake  in  our 
understanding  of  its  main  point  and  drift.  It  is 
worth  while  then  to  indicate  at  starting  where 
the  error  has  lain. 

1.  It  has  been  in  part  owing  to  our  mistaken 
habit  of  taking  isolated  '  texts '  out  of  their  con- 
nexion, as  if  they  were  detached  aphorisms.  Now 
St.  John,  in  his  meditative  method,  does  very 
generally  round  off  a  fundamental  Christian 
truth  into  an  aphorism  which  really  admits  of 
being  detached  and  quoted  apart  from  its  context. 
And  no  doubt  there  are  in  St.  Paul  detachable 
texts.  But  on  the  whole  St.  Paul,  least  of 
all  men,  admits  of  being  judged  by  detached 
fragments.  His  thought  is  always  in  process. 
It  looks  before  and  after.  He  is  seriously 
wronged  by  the  mere  fact  of  his  epistles  being 
divided  into  separate  verses,  and  sometimes 
arbitrary  chapters,  as  in  the  Authorized  Version. 
Thus  in  the  case  of  these  three  chapters,  the 
common  mistake  as  to  the  meaning  of  particular 
phrases  could  hardly  have  arisen  if  the  argument 
had  been  kept  in  mind  as  a  whole,  and  especially 
its  conclusion  as  to  the  universal  purpose  of 
divine  love — 'to  have  mercy  upon  all.' 

2.  For,  among  other  things,  the  true  meaning 


8  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

of  '  election  '  in  these  chapters  would  then  have 
been  apparent.  St.  Paul  has  been  popularly  mis- 
understood to  be  referring  to  God's  '  election '  of 
some  individual  men  to  salvation  in  heaven,  and 
His  abandonment  of  the  rest  to  hell.  Whereas 
the  argument  as  a  whole  and  its  conclusion  make 
it  quite  certain  that  what  he  is  speaking  of  is  the 
election  of  men  in  nations  or  churches  (only  sub- 
ordinately  of  individuals)  ^  to  a  position  of  special 
spiritual  privilege  and  responsibility  in  this 
world,  such  as  the  Jews  had  formerly  occupied, 
and  the  Christians  were  occupying  now — an 
election  to  be  the  people  of  God,  and  bear  His 
name  in  the  face  of  the  world — the  sort  of 
election  which  carries  with  it  a  great  joy  and 
a  special  opportunity,  but  not  by  any  means 
a  certainty  of  final  personal  acceptableness  to 

^  Of  course  the  election  of  the  nation  or  the  church  is  felt, 
especially  in  the  New  Testament,  or  whenever  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment individuality  is  fully  realized,  to  involve  the  election  of  each 
of  the  persons  composing  the  nation  or  the  church.  But  still 
their  election  is  a  challenge  to  their  faith,  and  no  guarantee  of 
ultimate  salvation.  St.  Paul  is  left  praying  and  suffering  '  for  the 
elect's  sake  that  they  also  may  obtain  the  salvation  .  .  .  with  eternal 
glory'  (2  Tim.  ii.  10).  The  elect  have  to  '  make  their  calling  and 
election  sure  '  (2  Peter  i.  10).  It  should,  however,  be  noticed 
that  election  may  be,  and  in  the  Gospels  is,  used  to  describe  the 
final  selection  of  those  who  are  proved  worthy  of  the  *  marriage 
supper  of  the  Lamb.'  (Matt.  xxii.  14.) 


5/.  PauVs  'theodicy* 


God,  apart  from  moral  faithfulness.  Apart  from 
such  faithfulness  the  '  children  of  the  kingdom 
shall  be  cast  into  the  outer  darkness,'  and  the 
highest  shall  be  put  lowest,  while  the  loudest 
are  raised  highest. 

3.  Another  cause  of  misunderstanding  has 
been  forgetfulness  of  the  point  of  view  of  the 
opponent  with  whom  St.  Paul  is  arguing.  In 
modern  times  assertions  of  divine  absoluteness, 
like  St.  PauFs,  have  been  made  by  teachers-who 
were  refusing  to  recognize  any  such  freedom  of 
the  will  in  the  individual  human  being — any  such 
power  to  control  his  own  personal  destiny— as 
seems  to  our  common  sense  to  be  involved  in 
moral  responsibility  in  any  real  sense.  St.  Paul 
has  therefore  been  supposed,  like  these  more 
recent  teachers,  to  be  asserting  divine  absolute- 
ness, or  the  unrestricted  freedom  of  divine 
choice,  as  against  human  freedom,  or  in  such 
a  way  as  to  destroy  the  idea  of  moral  responsi- 
bihty.  But  in  fact  St.  Paul  is  vindicating  moral 
responsibility.  His  opponent  is  the  Jew,  who 
holds  that  God  had  so  tied  His  hands  and  lost 
His  liberty  in  choosing  Israel  once  for  all  for 
His  elect  people,  that  every  child  of  Abraham 
can  at  all  times  claim  the  privileges  of  his 
election  for  no  other  reason  than  because  of  his 


lo         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

genealogy.  Such  a  doctrine  of  election  does 
indeed  destroy  all  real  moral  responsibility  in  the 
subject  of  it,  and  all  freedom  of  moral  choice  in 
God.  St.  Paul,  on  the  other  hand,  asserts  that 
God  remains  free  and  absolute  to  elect  and  to 
reject,  irrespective  of  all  questions  of  race,  where 
He  will  and  as  He  will.  The  absolute  reason 
of  God's  selections,  the  reason  why  certain  races 
and  individuals  are  chosen  for  special  privileges 
and  as  special  instruments  of  the  divine  purpose, 
lies  in  a  region  into  which  we  cannot  penetrate. 
But  because  God  has  shown  us  His  moral 
character  and  requirement,  we  can  know  how, 
and  how  only,  we  may  hope  to  retain  any 
position  which  God  has  given  us;  it  is  by 
exhibiting  moral  correspondence  with  His  pur- 
pose— that  is  faith — or  malleabihty  under  His 
hand. 

This  is  a  doctrine  then  which  lays  upon  '  the 
elect,'  at  any  particular  moment,  the  moral  re- 
sponsibility of  correspondence  with  a  divine 
purpose.  In  a  word,  St.  Paul  asserts  divine 
sovereignty  in  such  a  sense  as  vindicates  instead 
of  destroying  moral  responsibility,  while  his 
opponent  is  claiming  for  Israel  a  sort  of  freedom 
from  being  interfered  with,  which  would  really 
destroy  their   moral    responsibility  altogether. 


5/.  Paul's  ^theodicy*  ii 

Thus,  as  has  already  been  pointed  out\  nothing 
can  well  be  more  important  than  to  keep  clearly 
in  mind,  here  as  elsewhere,  with  whom  St.  Paul 
is  arguing. 

4.  It  is  worth  while  remarking,  before  we 
apply  ourselves  to  St.  Paul's  argument  in  detail, 
that  it  is  essentially  '  apologetic ' :  it  is  a  justi- 
fication of  God  in  view  of  certain  felt  difficulties  : 
and  it  is  an  argument  ad  hommem^  that  is  an 
argument  with  certain  people  on  their  own  as- 
sumptions, the  sort  of  argument  which  takes  the 
form  of  saying,  'you  at  least  have  no  right  on 
your  own  principles  to  urge  such  and  such  diffi- 
culties.' Now  we  are  bound  to  recognize  how 
very  important  at  all  periods  this  ad  hominem 
appeal  is :  how  very  important  it  is  to  get  men 
to  see  what  their  own  principles  really  involve. 
A  great  part  of  the  evil  of  the  world  comes 
through  people  not  thinking  out  what  they 
really  mean  and  believe.  But  on  the  other  hand, 
this  sort  of  argument,  which  proceeds  upon 
a  certain  set  of  assumptions,  has  often  a  merely 
temporary  force,  and  carries  with  it  an  accom- 
panying danger.  When  the  state  of  mind  contem- 
plated becomes  a  matter  of  history,  the  argument 
based  on  its  assumption  has  lost  its  power.     In 

^  Vol.  i.  pp.  114  f. 


12         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


view  of  a  quite  different  set  of  assumptions  it 
may  become  even  misleading.  For  example, 
Bishop  Butler  argued  for  the  truths  of  natural 
and  revealed  religion,  on  the  analogy  of  the 
facts  of  nature  and  on  the  assumption  of  a  divine 
author  of  nature,  thus  : — If,  as  you  admit,  God 
made  nature,  and  yet  nature  is  shown  to  contain 
such  and  such  facts  or  processes,  how  can  you 
argue  against  the  divine  authorship  of  natural 
religion  and  revelation  on  the  ground  that  it 
attributes  to  God  similar  facts  and  processes? 
This  was  a  very  effective  argument  so  long  as 
men  did  treat  the  doctrine  of  God  having  created 
the  world  as  a  matter  of  course.  But  when 
'agnosticism'  arose — when  men  ceased  to  dis- 
cover in  nature  any  decisive  argument  for  God 
or  against  God,  and  professed  only  an  inability 
to  draw  any  conclusion  at  all,  Butler's  argu- 
ment had  lost  its  force,  and  the  difficulties  in 
nature  and  religion  to  which  he  called  attention 
could  even  be  used  against  ascribing  a  divine 
authorship  to  either.  Apologetic  arguments  are 
always  liable  to  this  peril.  Thus  St.  Paul's 
arguments,  based  on  an  unhesitating  belief  that 
the  Old  Testament  contained  really  the  words 
of  God,  that  what  they  asserted  about  God  was 
certainly  true,  and  that  God  was  certainly  just 


Sf.  Paul's  ^theodicy'  13 

and  the  standard  of  justice,  may  have  an  effect 
very  contrary  to  his  intention  when  they  are 
apphed  to  people  who  feel  no  such  certainties. 
St.  Paul  may  seem  to  be  making  the  difficulties 
of  believing  in  the  Bible  only  more  obvious,  by 
calling  attention  to  its  'harsh  and  unedifying' 
elements. 

But  this  unfortunate  result  of  most  'apologies' 
is,  at  least  in  the  case  of  St.  Paul  and  Bishop 
Butler,  only  superficial.  If  the  apologetic  argu- 
ment is  really  deep,  it  retains,  if  not  exactly  its 
original  value,  yet  a  value  not  the  less  real. 
Butler's  indications  of  the  profound  analogy 
which  holds  between  the  doctrines  of  religion 
and  the  facts  of  nature,  can  never  be  out  of 
place  or  lose  force.  Still  less  can  men  ever 
cease  to  learn  the  deepest  lessons  from  his 
temper  of  mind  and  method.  And  that  it  is  so 
with  St.  Paul's  apology— that  it  contains  the 
profoundest  and  most  abiding  lessons  about  the 
responsibility  and  danger  of  all  elect  bodies  and 
individuals — will  appear  plainly  enough  in  what 
follows,  now  that  we  are  in  a  position  to  approach 
his  argument  in  detail. 


T4         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


DIVISION  IV.    §  I.    Chapter  IX.  1-13. 

The  present  rejection  of  Israelites  no  breach  of 
a  divine  promise. 

St.  Paul  has  finished  his  glowing  description 
of  the  position  and  prospects  of  the  elect  people 
of  God.  And  then,  by  contrast,  the  misery 
of  the  outcast  people  once  called  elect — his 
own  people — wrings  his  heart  with  pain.  The 
very  idea  that  in  his  new  enthusiasm  for  the 
catholic  church  he  can  be  supposed  to  be  for- 
getting those  who  are  of  his  own  flesh  and 
blood,  stirs  him  to  a  profound  protest.  He 
solemnly  asseverates  that  the  pain  which  IsraeFs 
rejection  causes  him  is  acute  and  continuous. 
He  has  caught  himself  at  the  point  of  praying 
to  be  himself  an  outcast  from  Christ,  if  so  be  he 
could  bring  the  people  of  his  own  kindred  and 
blood  into  the  Church.  For  who  indeed  could 
seem  to  have  so  good  a  title  to  be  there?  They 
are  the  Israelites— that  is  God's  own  people: 
the  eye  of  God  was  so  specially  upon  this  race 


No  divine  promise  broken  15 

that  He  redeemed  it  and  made  it  His  own  son^ : 
to  them  was  vouchsafed  the  shining  of  His  con- 
tinual presence  in  the  tabernacle^:  to  them,  in 
the  persons  of  the  patriarchs  and  of  Moses,  God 
gave  special  covenants,  that  is  to  say,  pledged 
His  word  to  them  in  an  unmistakable  manner 
and  repeatedly  that  He  should  be  their  God  and 
they  should  be  His  people :  thus  in  pursuance 
of  a  divine  purpose  they  were  brought  under 
the  education  of  the  divinely  given  law  and 
ritual  worship :  and  all  this  with  direct  and  re- 
peated promises  of  a  more  glorious  position  in 
the  future  to  be  brought  about  by  the  divine 
king,  the  Christ  who  was  to  be.  To  them 
finally  belongs  all  the  sanctity  which  can  attach  to 
a  people  from  having  numbered  among  its  mem- 
bers the  holy  ones  of  God  :  for  of  this  race  were 
the  patriarchs,  the  friends  of  God ;  and  of  this 
race,  so  far  as  human  birth  is  concerned,  came  in 
fact  the  Christ  who,  born  a  Jew,  is  sovereign  of 
the  universe  and  ever  blessed  God.  Surely  then, 
St.  Paul  implies,  that  this  race,  now  that  the 
Christ  they  were  expecting  is  at  last  come,  now 
that  the  goal  of  all  God's  dealings  with  them  is 
at  last  reached,  should  have  fallen  outside  the 
circle  of  His  people  and  be  no  longer  sharers  in 

>  Exod.  iv.  22;  Hos.  xi.  i.  '  Exod.  xvi.  lo. 


i6         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

the  sonship  or  the  election,  would  seem  a  result 
too  monstrous  to  contemplate.  The  contrast 
between  what  they  were  and  were  intended  for, 
and  what  in  present  appearance  they  are,  is 
indeed  appalling. 

Yet  the  natural  conclusion  for  the  Jew  to  draw, 
which  at  this  point  flashes  into  St.  Paul's  mind, 
the  conclusion  that  God  has  proved  unfaithful, 
is  not  the  true  one.  No:  God's  word,  God's 
promise,  has  not  broken  down.  For,  if  the  facts 
are  looked  at,  it  appears  quite  plainly  that  the 
Israel  of  God  was  never  simply  the  Israel  of 
physical  descent,  nor  the  children  of  Abraham 
simply  his  physical  seed.  Plainly  not.  For  Isaac 
and  Ishmael  were  equally  Abraham's  seed,  phy- 
sically considered,  but  for  the  purpose  of  God 
the  promise  is  given  only  to  the  family  of  the 
younger  son,  Isaac  (Gen.  xxi.  12),  who  moreover 
was  born,  not  in  the  mere  natural  order,  but 
under  circumstances  of  special  divine  promise 
and  intervention  (Gen.  xviii.  10).  And  if  in  this 
case  it  be  said  that  the  younger  son  Isaac 
was  the  only  son  of  Sarah,  the  wife  and  free 
woman,  and  therefore  had  a  natural  prerogative 
over  Ishmael,  3^et  the  same  inscrutable  principle 
of  selection  is  apparent  in  the  next  generation, 
in  a  case  where  there  is  no  possible  inequality 


No  divine  promise  broken  17 

of  natural  claim— in  the  case  of  the  two  sons 
born  simultaneously  to  Isaac  of  the  same  mother. 
Prior  to  their  birth,  and  prior  therefore  to  any 
possible  merit  or  demerit  on  their  own  part 
— so  that  God's  absolute  freedom  of  choice 
should  appear  quite  conspicuously — the  younger 
Jacob  was  deliberately  preferred  over  the  elder 
Esau  (Gen.  xxv.  23).  And  in  fact  this  race  of 
Esau,  this  Edom— though  they  were  Israelites 
after  the  flesh — appear  in  history  as  something 
much  worse  than  merely  secondary  to  the  true 
Israel;  for  God  speaks  by  Malachi  and  de- 
clares that,  whereas  Israel  is  His  beloved  son, 
Esau,  that  is  Edom,  He  has  '  hated '  (Mai.  i.  3). 
No  Israelite  therefore  who  reads  his  scriptures 
(St.  Paul  would  conclude)  ought  to  have  failed  to 
perceive  an  inscrutable  element  in  God's  choice 
of  his  chosen  people.  He  ought  not  to  have 
felt  in  his  own  case,  any  more  than  in  that  of  the 
first  children  of  Abraham  or  Isaac,  that  he  coujd 
be  sure  of  membership  in  the  people  of  God 
merely  because  of  his  physical  descent. 

I  say  the  truth  in  Christ,  I  He  not,  my  conscience  bearing 
witness  with  me  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  I  have  great 
sorrow  and  unceasing  pain  in  my  heart.  For  I  could 
wish^  that  I  myself  were  anathema  from  Christ  for  my 

'  Or  '  pray  '  (marg.)  literally  '  I  was  praying.' 
11.  C 


i8         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

brethren's  sake,  my  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesh :  who 
are  Israelites ;  whose  is  the  adoption,  and  the  glory,  and 
the  covenants,  and  the  giving  of  the  law,  and  the  service 
of  God,  and  the  promises  ;  whose  are  the  fathers,  and  of 
whom  is  Christ  as  concerning  the  flesh,  who  is  over  all, 
God  blessed  for  ever.  Amen.  But  it  is  not  as  though  the 
word  of  God  hath  come  to  nought.  For  they- are  not  all 
Israel,  which  are  of  Israel :  neither,  because  they  are 
Abraham's  seed,  are  they  all  children  :  but.  In  Isaac  shall 
thy  seed  be  called.  That  is,  it  is  not  the  children  of  the 
flesh  that  are  children  of  God ;  but  the  children  of  the 
promise  are  reckoned  for  a  seed.  For  this  is  a  word  of 
promise.  According  to  this  season  will  I  come,  and  Sarah 
shall  have  a  son.  And  not  only  so  ;  but  Rebecca  also 
having  conceived  by  one,  even  by  our  father  Isaac — for  the 
children  being  not  yet  born,  neither  having  done  anything 
good  or  bad,  that  the  purpose  of  God  according  to  election 
might  stand,  not  of  works,  but  of  him  that  calleth,  it  was 
said  unto  her.  The  elder  shall  serve  the  younger.  Even 
as  it  is  written,  Jacob  I  loved,  but  Esau  I  hated. 

I.  St.  Paul's  earnest  asseveration  is  very  notice- 
able in  form.  It  shows  so  much  of  his  instinctive 
inward  Hfe.  He  lives  '  in  Christ/  who  is  light 
as  well  as  life\  and  to  speak  the  truth  is  the 
very  atmosphere  of  this  new  life^.  As  it  comes 
natural  to  many  people  to  say  '  upon  my  word 
as  a  gentleman,'  it  comes  natural  to  St.  Paul  to 
say,  'speaking  as  in  Christ,  who  is  the  light.' 
And  his  natural  conscience — that  is  the  faculty 
of  passing  judgement  on    one's   own  actions, 

»  Cf.  Eph.  V.  8-14.  '  Cf.  Col.  iii.  9. 


No  divine  promise  broken  19 

which  in  St.  Paul's  case  bears  witness  to  the 
truth  of  what  he  says  by  passing  no  censure  on 
him — that  too  does  not  act  of  itself  merely,  but 
in  the  Spirit  of  the  new  life,  the  Holy  Spirit  of 
Christ,  which  inspires  and  ratifies  the  moral 
judgement,  otherwise  so  liable  to  be  degraded 
or  perverted  or  silenced :  his  conscience  bears 
witness  with  his  word  in  the  Holy  Ghost.  Here, 
then,  is  the  whole  secret  of  Christian  truthful- 
ness. The  Christian  is  truthful  because  he  lives 
and  speaks  in  God,  in  Christ,  in  the  Spirit. 

As  to  St.  Paul's  half-expressed  prayer  ('  I  was 
praying,'  he  says,  i.e. '  I  caught  myself  praying '), 
it  resembles  that  of  Moses  for  his  rebellious 
peopled  'And  now,  O  Lord,  if  thou  wilt  for- 
give their  sin — ;  and  it  not,  blot  me,  I  pray 
thee,  out  of  thy  book  which  thou  hast  writ- 
ten.' But  St.  Paul's  instinctive  desire  is  not 
apparently  like  that  of  Moses,  to  perish  with  his 
people  rather  than  be  saved  without  them ;  but 
to  offer  himself  for  rejection  with  a  view  to  their 
salvation.  The  prayer  is,  as  St.  Paul  implies, 
an  impossible  prayer,  but  it  expresses,  as  hardly 
anything  else  could,  the  intensity  of  his  feeling. 
And  such  intensity  of  feeling  was  natural  to  the 
deep  religious  patriotism  of  a  Jew. 

^  Exod.  xxxii.  32. 
C  2 


20         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

We  may  illustrate  St.  Paul's  feeling  by  com- 
paring a  fine  expression  of  a  more  commonplace 
sorrow  over  the  ruin  of  Israel  from  a  period 
after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ^  '  Now 
therefore  I  will  speak  ;  touching  man  in 
general,  thou  knowest  best ;  but  touching  thy 
people  will  I  speak,  for  whose  sake  I  am  sorry ; 
and  for  thine  inheritance,  for  whose  cause 
I  mourn ;  and  for  Israel,  for  whom  I  am  heavy ; 
and  for  the  seed  of  Jacob,  for  whose  sake  I  am 
troubled.'  'Thou  seest  that  our  sanctuary  is 
laid  waste,  our  altar  broken  down,  our  temple 
destroyed;  our  psaltery  is  brought  low,  our 
song  is  put  to  silence,  our  rejoicing  is  at  an  end; 
the  light  of  our  candlestick  is  put  out,  the  ark  of 
our  covenant  is  spoiled,  our  holy  things  are 
defiled,  and  the  name  that  is  called  upon  us  is 
profaned ;  our  freemen  are  despiteful ly  treated, 
our  priests  are  burnt,  our  Levites  are  gone  into 
captivity,  our  virgins  are  defiled,  and  our  wives 
ravished  ;  our  righteous  men  carried  away,  our 
little  ones  betrayed,  our  young  men  are  brought 
into  bondage,  and  our  strong  men  are  become 
weak ;  and,  what  is  more  than  all,  the  seal  of 
Sion— for  she  hath  now  lost  the  seal  of  her 

*  2  Esdr.  viii.  15-16,  x.  21-23,    The  latter  passage  is  not  spoken 
to  God,  but  by  one  Jew  to  another. 


No  divine  promise  broken  21 

honour,  and  is  delivered  into  the  hands  of  them 
that  hate  us.' 

2.  As  we  read  St.  Paul's  enumeration  of  the 
glories  of  Israel,  it  is  of  course  obvious  for  us  to 
pursue  the  line  of  thought  taught  us  elsewhere 
by  St.  Paul,  and  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews; 
and  to  recognize  how  each  element  of  the 
*  glor}^,'  which  belonged  once  to  the  Jewish 
'  ministration  of  condemnation,'  belongs  in 
deeper  and  fuller  measure  to  the  Christian  'mini- 
stration of  the  Spirit  \'  Ours  is  the  vocation  of 
the  chosen  people ;  ours  is  the  sonship  to  God ; 
and  the  perpetual  presence  ;  and  the  security  of 
divine  covenant ;  ours  is  the  divine  law,  and  with 
it,  what  is  much  better,  the  Spirit  for  its  accom- 
pHshment ;  ours  is  the  corporate  worship  in 
spirit  and  in  truth,  the  Church's  eucharist ;  for 
us,  too,  are  promises  which  the  realization  of 
those  of  the  first  covenant  has  made  'more 
sure ' ;  ours  finally  is  the  communion  of  the 
saints  from  Abraham  onward  into  the  body  of 
Christ.  And  in  proportion  therefore  to  the 
greatness  of  our  privileges,  even  as  compared 
with  those  of  the  older  covenant,  is  the  great- 
ness of  our  responsibility ;  '  For  I  would  not, 
brethren,  have  you  ignorant  2,'  St.  Paul  would 
'  ?  Cor.  iii.  8.  ^  See  i  Cor.  x.  1-13. 


22         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

say ;  he  would  not  have  us  fail  to  profit  by  the 
warnings  of  old  days.  And  another  voice 
warns  us  'Of  how  much  sorer  punishment 
shall  he  be  thought  worthy,  who  hath  trodden 
under  foot  the  Son  of  God,  and  hath  counted 
the  blood  of  the  covenant,  wherewith  he  was 
sanctified,  an  unholy  thing,  and  hath  done 
despite  unto  the  Spirit  of  graced' 

3.  There  has  been  amongst  critics,  since 
Erasmus,  much  controversy  over  the  clause, 
'  who  is  overall,  God  blessed  for  ever.'  There  is 
no  doubt  that  it  is  translated  most  natural^,  and 
most  agreeably  to  the  balance  and  movement  of 
the  sentence,  if  we  attribute  it  to  Christ,  as 
above.  But  many  critics,  including  some  who 
were  orthodox,  have  stumbled  at  the  idea  of 
St.  Paul  speaking  of  Christ  straight  out  as  '  over 
all,  God  blessed  for  ever.'  Generally  no  doubt 
*  God '  is  used  by  St.  Paul  as  a  proper  name  of 
the  Father.  But  Christ  is  continually  recog- 
nized as  possessing  strictly  divine  attributes, 
and  exercising  strictly  divine  functions;  and 
in  all  St.  Paul's  epistles,  beginning  with  his 
earliest  to  the  Thessalonians,  He  is  God's  Son, 
His  own  or  proper  Son  I  His  blood,  as  shed 
for    our   ransoming,    is   God's   own   blood,    or 

'  Heb.  X.  29.  2  I  Thess.  i.  10  j  Rom.  viii.  3. 


No  divine  promise  broken  23 

(possibly)  the  blood  of  one  who  is  '  His  own '  ^ 
He  subsisted  eternally  in  the  form,  or  essential 
attributes,  of  God,  and  in  possession  of  equality 
with  Him ;  and  He  possesses  now,  as  glorified 
in  humanity,  the  divine  name  of  universal 
sovereignty,  the  object  of  universal  worship-. 
Therefore  He  is  in  the  strictest  sense  divine ; 
and  whatever  or,  I  should  sa}^,  whoever  is 
essentially  divine  and  proper  to  the  being  of 
God,  can  rightly  be  called  God.  For,  indeed, 
there  is  nothing  in  the  strict  sense  divine  but 
God  Himself.  It  was  then  merely  a  question  of 
time  when  Christians  would  become  sufficiently 
familiar  with  the  new  revelation  of  the  threefold 
name  to  apply  the  word  God  to  the  Son  and 
the  Spirit  as  naturally  as  to  the  Father.  And 
there  is  nothing  really  to  surprise  us  in  St.  Paul 
here  applying  it  to  Christ  ^ :  nothing  certainly 
to  warrant  us  in  doing  violence  to  the  sentence, 
in  order  to  obviate  the  conclusion  that  he  did 
so,  by  putting  a  full  stop  after  '  flesh,'  and  then 
supposing  an  abrupt  exclamation  '  He  who  is 
over  all  is  God  blessed  for  ever  * ! ' 

1  Acts  XX.  28.  2  pj^ii^  ii^  5_jj 

2  Without  the  article  which  makes  it  a  proper  name  of  the 
Father. 

*  R.  v.  margin  ^     It  does  further  violence  to  the  Greek  to 
translate  as  R.  V.  margin',  'He  who  is  God  over  all   is  (be) 


24         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

Let  it  be  recognized,  then,  that  St.  Paul  here 
plainly  speaks  of  Christ  as  '  over  all,'  i.e.  in  His 
glorified  manhood,  and  also  as  '  God  blessed  for 
ever' — that  is,  as  the  one  proper  and  eternal 
object  of  human  praise ;  and  that  he  speaks  of 
Him  again  elsewhere \  as  'our  great  God  and 
Saviour.'  It  was  only  because  He  was  essen- 
tially and  eternally  '  God  '  that  He  could,  in  our 
manhood  and  as  the  reward  of  His  human 
obedience,  be  exalted  to  divine  sovereignty  and 
be  '  over  all.' 

4.  In  the  rest  of  the  section  St.  Paul  is 
arguing  with  a  Jew,  who  makes  the  claim  that 
because  of  the  divine  covenant  God  is  bound  to 
the  Israelites,  and  to  all  Israelites  for  ever. 
'  We  have  Abraham  to  our  father,'  and  that  is 
enough  ^.  The  higher  prophetic  spirit  of  the 
Old  Testament  had  already  realized  that  God's 
election  of  Israel  was  a  challenge  to  her  to 
prove  herself  worthy  of  an  undeserved  privi- 
lege ^,  and  that,  though  a  faithful  remnant  would 


blessed  for  ever.'  I  have  nothing  to  add  on  the  matter  to  S.  and 
H.  in  he,  especially  p.  236. 

^  Tit.  ii.  13.     This  is  probably  the  right  rendering. 

2  St.  Matt.  iii.  9. 

^  Great  stress  was  laid  by  the  prophets  on  the  absence  of  any 
original  merit  or  powder  in  Israel,  which  caused  the  divine  election; 
see  Ezek.  xvi,  Pent,  xxvi,    . 


No  divine  promise  broken  25 

never  fail,  yet  unfaithfulness  in  the  bulk  of  the 
nation  would  bring  destruction  upon  them  and 
loss  of  God's  favour^.  The  prophetic  spirit  had 
realized  also  that  God's  servant  Israel  was  not 
'called'  for  his  own  selfish  honour's  sake, but  was 
entrusted  with  a  divine  ministry  to  fulfil  for  all 
the  nations  of  the  earth  I  It  is  to  this  higher 
sense  of  what  Israel's  position  meant,  and  the 
perils  it  involved,  that  John  the  Baptist  and  our 
Lord  Himself  had  sought  to  recall  the  Jews. 
They  must  not  '  think  to  say  within  themselves, 
They  had  Abraham  for  their  Father;  for  God 
was  able  of  the  stones  to  raise  up  children  unto 
Abraham.'  For  'many  should  come  from  the 
east  and  the  west,  and  sit  down  with  Abraham, 
and  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  in  the  kingdom  of  God, 
and  the  sons  of  the  kingdom  should  be  cast  into 


^  See  especially  Amos  ix.  7-10  :  '  Are  ye  not  as  the  children  of 
the  Ethiopians  unto  me,  O  children  of  Israel  ?  saith  the  Lord. 
Have  not  I  brought  up  Israel  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  the 
Philistines  from  Caphtor,  and  the  Syrians  from  Kir  ?  Behold,  the 
eyes  of  the  Lord  God  are  upon  the  sinful  kingdom,  and  I  will 
destroy  it  from  off  the  face  of  the  earth  ;  saving  that  I  will  not 
utterly  destroy  the  house  of  Jacob,  saith  the  Lord.  For,  lo,  I  will 
command,  and  I  will  sift  the  house  of  Israel  among  all  the  nations, 
like  as  corn  is  sifted  in  a  sieve,  yet  shall  not  the  least  grain  fall 
upon  the  earth.  All  the  sinners  of  my  people  shall  die  by  the 
sword,  which  say,  The  evil  shall  not  overtake  nor  prevent  us.' 

2  Gen.  xii.  3 ;  Isa.  Ixvi.  18 ;  Zech.  viii.  23,  &c. 


26         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

the  outer  darkness  \'  But  it  is  evident  that  this 
higher  meaning  of  the  doctrine  of  election  had 
been  forgotten  by  contemporary  Judaism,  and 
they  would  not  be  recalled  to  it.  They  refused 
to  contemplate  the  spiritual  risk  of  missing  their 
vocation,  or  the  universal  purpose  for  which  it 
was  given.  They  chose  to  think  that  Israel, 
i.  e.  the  actual  Israelites  in  bulk,  must  remain 
God's  elect;  that  the  Christ,  when  He  came, 
must  come  to  exalt  their  race  and  nation :  that 
they  were  bound  to  inherit  the  blessings  of  the 
world  to  come  :  that  the  divine  government  of 
the  world  existed  for  their  sakes  ^. 

St.  Paul,  then,  is  here  intending  to  vindicate 
the  real  meaning  of  election,  in  the  sense  in 
which  it  is  bound  up  with  the  ethical  character 
of  God  and  carries  with  it  a  deepened  feeling  of 
responsibility  in  those  who  are  the  subjects  of  it. 

^  Matt.  viii.  ii,  12. 

^  In  Weber's  Ji'idische  Theologie  (Leipzig,  1897,  formerly  called 
System  der  Altsynagog.  Paldstin.  Theol.  or  Die  Lehre  des  Talmud), 
pp.  51  ff,  there  are  striking  illustrations  from  the  Talmud  of  this 
fixed  tendency  of  thought  among  the  Jews.  Thus  '  there  exists 
no  clearer  proof  of  the  Talmudic  conviction  of  the  absolutely  holy 
character  of  Israel  than  that  in  all  the  places  of  Scripture  in  which 
Israel  is  reproved  and  has  evil  attributed  to  it,  the  expression, 
' '  the  haters  of  Israel,"  is  substituted  for  Israel.*  *  We  read  :  Isaiah 
was  punished,  because  he  called  Israel  a  people  of  unclean  lips,' 
&c.     Cf.  S.  and  H.,  p.  249,  and  my  Ephesians,  p.  261. 


No  divine  promise  broken  27 

But  his  argument  is  directed,  first  of  all,  to  one 
point  only — to  bringing  the  eyes  of  the  Jews 
straight  up  to  their  own  scriptures,  and  forcing 
them  to  see  that  they  do  not  justify  the  idea 
of  election  purely  by  race.  It  is  not  all  of  a 
certain  seed,  but  only  part  of  it,  that  is  chosen. 
There  is  nothing  to  hinder  a  great  part  of  the 
race  again  becoming  as  Ishmael  or  as  Edom  by 
the  side  of  Israel.  Ultimately,  no  doubt,  there 
are  two  points  to  be  proved.  First,  that  God's 
method  of  choosing  an  elect  body  to  be  His 
people  in  the  world  is  inscrutable,  so  that  we 
cannot  produce  or  determine  His  election  b}^ 
any  calculation,  or  by  any  real  or  supposed 
merits,  of  ours ;  second^,  that  though  we  can- 
not create  our  vocation,  w^e  can  retain  it  by 
moral  correspondence  or  faith,  and  by  that  only. 
But  at  present  it  is  only  the  first  point  that  is 
insisted  upon — the  absolute,  inscrutable  element 
in  the  divine  choice.  And  that,  we  should 
notice,  is  a  fact  not  merely  of  scriptural  evidence 
but  of  common  experience.  Men  are  born  to 
higher  and  lower  positions  of  privilege  and 
opportunity.  They  are  born  Jacobs  or  Esaus, 
in  respect  of  moral,  intellectual,  religious,  or 
physical  endowment— with  ten  talents,  or  five,  or 
two,  or  one  ;  and  God  does  not  often  give  us  so 


28         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

much  as  a  glimpse  of  the  reason  why.  All  He 
does  make  clear  to  us  is  that  the  determination 
of  human  vocations,  higher  or  lower,  is  in  wiser 
hands  than  ours. 

It  is  of  course  evident,  as  has  already  been 
said,  that  what  St.  Paul  is  speaking  about  is  the 
election  of  men,  and  specially  races  or  nations  of 
men,  to  a  position  of  spiritual  privilege  in  this 
world.  We  know  now,  better  than  the  Jews  of 
the  Old  Covenant  could  know  it,  that  behind 
all  the  apparent  injustices  and  inequalities  of 
this  world  hes  the  rectifying  equity  of  God. 
St.  Peter  had  come  to  beheve  that  the  divine 
mercy  had  rectified  in  the  world  beyond  death 
the  apparently  rough  and  heavy  handed  judge- 
ment upon  the  rejected  mass  of  mankind  in  the 
time  of  the  Flood.  That  physical  catastrophe 
at  least  was  an  instrument  of  mercy  in  dis- 
guise ^  St.  Paul  believed  the  same  about  all 
God's  rejections,  as  well  as  elections,  in  this 
world.  They  served  one  universal  purpose : 
'That  he  might  have  mercy  upon  alP.'      But 

'  I  Pet.  iv.  6.  'The  gospel  was  preached  to'  these  'dead  men 
that  they  might  be  judged  according  to  men  in  the  flesh/  i.  e.  by 
perishing  in  the  flood,  '  but  live  according  to  God  in  the  spirit,' 
i.  e.  through  our  Lord's  preaching  in  Hades.  There  is,  I  think, 
so  far,  no  ambiguity  about  this  passage. 

2  Not,  however,  without  regard  to  man's  will  to  respond  to  the 
divine  offer,  see  later,  p.  82  ff. 


No  divine  promise  broken  29 

all  the  same  here  and  now  in  this  world  God 
does  work  by  means  of  enormous  inequalities. 
There  are  Jacobs  whom  He  plainly  loves, 
upon  whom  He  showers  all  His  richest  blessings, 
and  Esaus  whom,  to  judge  from  present 
evidence,  we  should  say  He  hates — whom  He 
sets  to  live  in  hardest  and  most  cramping 
surroundings.  And  no  man  can  determine 
which  lot  he  shall  enjoy.  That  lies  in  the 
inscrutable  selectiveness  of  God. 

That  there  is  no  question  at  all  about  the 
eternal  welfare  of  the  individual  Esau's  soul — 
that  the  question  is  simply  of  the  comparative 
status  of  Israel  and  Edom  in  this  world- 
appears  plainly  in  the  passage  of  Malachi, 
which  St.  Paul  quotes.  And  we  must  notice 
how  unexpected  an  application  St.  Paul  gives 
to  this  passage  in  a  direction  most  unfamiliar 
to  Jewish  thought.  For  Edom  was  to  the  Jew 
the  very  type  of  all  that  was  most  hateful.  He 
anticipated  for  the  Edomites  God's  worst  ven- 
geance, as  for  Israel  God's  best  blessings.  But 
St.  Paul  forces  him  to  think— Why  should  he 
assume  that  he  will  be  better  off  than  Edom? 
Edom  was  once  physically  on  Israel's  level,  or 
his  superior  in  claim,  when  their  first  fathers 
were  but  just  born  infants.     But  God  chose  one 


30         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

and  not  the  other.  He  may  exercise  the  Hke 
unscrutable  selectiveness  upon  the  seed  of 
Israel  to-day.  And  Edom  did  not  remain  in 
a  merely  secondary  position.  He  sank  to  be 
a  byword  for  all  that  is  most  hateful  to  God. 
Be  warned,  St.  Paul  would  say,  it  may  be  that 
'  with  change  of  name  the  tale  is  told  of  thee  ^.* 

'  Mai.  i.  2,  3.  'Was  not  Esau  Jacob's  brother?  saith  the  Lord  : 
yet  I  loved  Jacob  ;  but  Esau  I  hated,  and  made  his  mountains  a 
desolation,  and  gave  his  heritage  to  the  jackals  of  the  wilderness. 
Whereas  Edom  saith,  We  are  beaten  down,  but  we  will  return,' 
&c.  This  passage  (i)  plainly  refers  to  Esau  as  meaning  Edom, 
the  people  ;  (2)  describes  not  the  original  lot  of  Esau,  which  was 
secondary  indeed,  but  highly  blessed  (Gen.  xxvii.  39,  40)  ;  but  the 
ultimate  lot  of  Esau  when  he  had  misused  his  original  endowment 
in  violence  and  cruelty'. 


God's  liberty  to  choose  and  reject    31 


DIVISION  IV.  §  2.    Chapter  IX.  14-29. 

God's  liberty  in  sJiowiug  mercy  and  jiidgcnient 
always  retained  and  asserted. 

But  the  obvious  reply  of  the  Jewish  objector 
to  St.  Paul's  assertion  of  the  absolute  and 
apparently  arbitrary  freedom  of  God's  election 
is  that  it  is  unfair.  It  convicts  God  of  un- 
righteousness. To  this  objection  (ver.  14),  which 
St.  Paul  deprecates  with  horror,  he  replies  not 
by  any  large  consideration  of  divine  justice,  but 
still  by  keeping  the  Jew  to  his  own  scriptures. 
The  God  revealed  in  scripture  must  be  to  the 
objector  still  the  just  God.  He  cannot  call  God 
unjust  if  His  method  as  it  now  appears  is  that 
to  which  He  called  attention  long  ago.  Look 
back,  then,  at  the  past  records.  Did  God  dis»  ' 
close  Himself  as  bound  to  show  mercy  on  Moses 
the  Israelite,  or  to  harden  and  judicially  con* 
demn  Pharaoh  the  Egyptian  ?  No,  He  declares 
to  Moses  His  unrestricted  freedom  to  exhibit  His 


32         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

compassion  on  whom  He  will  (Exod.  xxxiii.  19). 
Men  cannot  by  any  choice  or  efforts  of  their 
own  produce  an  exhibition  of  divine  favour  such 
as  was  shown  to  Moses  the  leader  of  Israel:  the 
absolute  initiative  must  come  from  God,  and  in 
taking  that  initiative  He  declares  Himself  abso- 
lutely free.  In  the  same  way  God  implicitly 
asserts  His  sovereign  freedom  when  He  brings 
Pharaoh  out  upon  the  stage  of  history  as  an 
example  of  the  way  in  which  He  hardens  men's 
hearts  with  a  hardening  which  is  the  prelude  to 
overthrow,  that  men  all  over  the  world  may  see 
and  tremble  at  the  divine  power.  It  is  not 
because  Pharaoh  is  an  Egyptian  that  he  is 
hardened.  He  is  hardened,  as  Moses  has  com- 
passion shown  him,  simply  because  it  is  the  will 
of  God  so  to  do  in  his  case. 

But  the  objector  comes  forward  again  (ver.  19): 
'  If  this  is  the  arbitrary  method  of  God — if  we 
are  simply  powerless  puppets  in  the  hands  of  an 
absolute  and  arbitrary  will,  to  be  saved  or  be 
destroyed— at  any  rate  He  has  no  reason  to 
complain  of  us.  If  all  the  power  is  His,  so  is 
the  responsibility.'  Now  St.  Paul  has  it  in  his 
hand  to  show  that  there  remains  to  man  a  very 
real  power  to  retain  his  position,  and  conse- 
quently a  very  real  responsibility  and  room  for 


God*s  liberty  to  choose  and  reject    33 

being  blamed  or  praised  :  for  if  we  cannot  create 
our  vocation,  we  can  and  we  are  required  to 
correspond  with  it  in  a  reverent  and  docile  faith ; 
and  it  was  exactly  here  that  the  Jews  had  failed, 
in  spite  of  all  their  prophets  had  taught  them. 
But  he  keeps  back  this  answer  awhile,  because 
he  finds  the  attitude  of  such  an  objector  toward 
God  in  itself  so  reprehensible.  Such  an  one  has 
not  given  consideration  to  what  the  relation  of 
man  to  God  really  is — the  creature  to  the  creator. 
His  critical,  complaining  attitude  is  nothing  better 
than  foolish. 

Thus  he  takes  his  antagonist  back  upon  the 
old  prophetic  metaphor  of  the  potter  and  his 
clay,  with  which  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  had  re- 
buked the  arrogance  and  impatience  of  men 
long  ago :  '  Shall  the  thing  framed  say  of  him 
that  framed  it,  He  hath  no  understanding;  and 
shall  the  clay  say  to  him  that  fashioneth  it,  What 
makest  thou^?'  He  follows,  however,  most 
closely  upon  the  later  writer  of  the  Book  of 
Wisdom:  'For  a  potter,  kneading  soft  earth, 
laboriously  mouldeth  each  several  vessel  for 
our  service:  nay,  out  of  the  same  clay  doth 
he  fashion  both  the  vessels  that  minister  to 
clean  uses,  and  those  of  a  contrary  sort.    All  in 

^  Isa.  xxix.  16,  xlv.  9,  Ixiv.  8  ;  Jer.  xviii.  6  ;  Ecclus.  xxxiii.  13. 
II.  D 


34         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

like  manner ;  but  what  shall  be  the  use  of  each 
vessel  of  either  sort,  the  craftsman  himself  is 
the  judge  ^/  The  thought  was  often  in  St.  Paul's 
mind  of  the  inequahty  of  lots  in  the  world  and 
the  Church.  There  are  more  and  less  honourable 
limbs  in  the  body  politic :  there  are  vessels  for 
honourable  and  vessels  for  dishonourable  pur- 
poses in  the  great  social  economy^.  So  it  is 
with  the  races  of  men.  They  are  all  of  one 
blood — of  the  one  lump.  But  some  have  high 
and  others  low  vocations,  and  the  right  to 
determine  of  what  sort  the  lot  shall  be  in  each 
case  lies  absolutely  with  the  Divine  Potter.  It 
is  childish  to  dispute  His  title.  And  not  only 
so :  when  the  potter,  whom  Jeremiah  was  ordered 
to  observe,  found  a  vessel  he  was  making  marred 
under  his  hand,  'he  made  it  again  another  vessel, 
as  seemed  good  to  the  potter  to  make  it^.' 
Accordingly,  when  the  chosen  material  (i.  e.  the 
Jews)  would  not  mould  to  the  high  purpose  for 
which  the  Potter  was  fashioning  it,  who  shall 
complain  if  He  diverted  it  to  lower  uses  or 
threw  it  away  to  destruction,  and  produced  out 

^   XV.  7. 

2  1  Cor.  xii.  22-5 ;  2  Tim.  ii.  20. 

^  Jer.  xviii.  4.  The  passage  continues  with  a  strong  assertion 
of  God's  freedom  to  govern  the  destinies  of  nations  on  moral 
principles. 


God's  liberty  to  choose  and  reject    35 

of  His  stores  other  vessels  which  He  had  already 
prepared  and  destined  for  glorious  functions  (that 
is  to  say,  the  Gentile  Christians)  ?  But  the  case 
is  even  stronger  than  this.  Who  indeed  shall 
complain  if,  when  the  vessels  originally  destined 
for  the  higher  uses  prove  fit  for  nothing  but 
destruction,  the  Divine  Potter — though  willing, 
now  as  in  the  case  of  Pharaoh,  to  let  His  wrath 
fall  and  to  manifest  His  power — yet  shows  almost 
unlimited  forbearance  with  them  (as  in  fact  God 
did  with  the  Jews) ;  and  when  at  last  He  does 
let  His  wrath  fall,  only  does  so  in  order  to 
manifest  anew  the  resourcefulness  of  His  mercy^ 
upon  a  new  and  larger  Israel,  gathered  not  from 
among  the  Jews  only,  but  from  among  all  nations, 
to  be  the  object  of  His  compassionate  regard? 

Indeed,  the  prophet  Hosea  (ii.  23,  i.  10)  fore- 
saw this  choice  of  a  yet  unrecognized  people 
to  be  God's  people.  Isaiah  again  (x.  22)  antici- 
pated no  more  than  a  remnant  surviving  of  all 
the  multitudes  of  Israel,  because  of  the  sharpness 
and  conclusiveness  of  the  divine  judgement  upon 
them.  And  (i.  9)  it  is  only  to  the  compassion  of 
God  that  he  attributes  their  exemption  by  means 

^  When  Moses  asked  to  see  God's  glory  (Exod.  xxxiii.  i8), 
what  was  revealed  to  him  was  His  goodness  and  free  mercy,  and 
what  St.  Paul  here  means  by  God's  glory  is  His  mercy  especially. 

D  2 


36         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

of  the  faithful  remnant  from  entire  annihilation, 
hke  that  of  the  Cities  of  the  Plain. 

What  shall  we  say  then  ?  Is  there  unrighteousness 
with  God  ?  God  forbid.  For  he  saith  to  Moses,  I  will 
have  mercy  on  whom  I  have  mercy,  and  I  will  have  com- 
passion on  whom  I  have  compassion.  So  then  it  is  not 
of  him  that  willeth,  nor  of  him  that  runneth,  but  of  God 
that  hath  mercy.  For  the  scripture  saith  unto  Pharaoh, 
For  this  very  purpose  did  I  raise  thee  up,  that  I  might 
shew  in  thee  my  power,  and  that  my  name  might  be 
pubhshed  abroad  in  all  the  earth.  So  then  he  hath  mercy 
on  whom  he  will,  and  whom  he  will  he  hardeneth. 

Thou  wilt  say  then  unto  me,  Why  doth  he  still  find  fault  ? 
For  who  withstandeth  his  will  ?  Nay  but,  O  man,  who  art 
thou  that  repliest  against  God  ?  Shall  the  thing  formed 
say  to  him  that  formed  it,  Why  didst  thou  make  me  thus  ? 
Or  hath  not  the  potter  a  right  over  the  clay,  from  the 
same  lump  to  make  one  part  a  vessel  unto  honour,  and 
another  unto  dishonour  ?  What  if  God,  willing  to  shew 
his  wrath,  and  to  make  his  power  known,  endured  with 
much  longsuffering  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  unto  destruc- 
tion :  and  that  he  might  make  known  the  riches  of  his 
glory  upon  vessels  of  mercy,  which  he  afore  prepared 
unto  glory,  even  us,  whom  he  also  called,  not  from  the 
Jews  only,  but  also  from  the  Gentiles  ?  As  he  saith  also 
in  Hosea, 

I  will  call  that  my  people,  which  was  not  my  people  ; 

And  her  beloved,  which  was  not  beloved. 

And  it  shall  be,  that  in  the  place  where  it  was  said 
unto  them,  Ye  are  not  my  people, 

There  shall  they  be  called  sons  of  the  living  God. 
And  Isaiah  crieth  concerning  Israel,  If  the  number  of 
the  children  of  Israel  be  as  the  sand  of  the  sea,  it  is  the 


God's  liberty  to  choose  and  reject    37 

remnant  that  shall  be  saved :  for  the  Lord  will  execute 
his  word  upon  the  earth,  finishing  it  and  cutting  it  short. 
And,  as  Isaiah  hath  said  before, 

Except  the  Lord  of  Sabaoth  had  left  us  a  seed. 
We  had  become  as  Sodom,  and  had  been  made  like 
unto  Gomorrah. 

What  has  been  already  said  will  have  been 
enough  to  guard  against  the  main  sources  of 
mistake  in  reading  this  section.  St.  Paul  might 
have  much  to  say  about  God's  righteousness  in 
general,  and  large  wa3^s  of  vindicating  it.  But 
here  he  holds  fast  to  the  single  aspect  of  right- 
eousness according  to  which  it  means  that  God 
has  been  true  to  the  original  principles  of  His 
covenant.  The  God  who  chose  Abraham  and 
Moses  is  the  God  who  is  now,  and  rightly  on 
His  own  declared  principles  of  government,  re- 
jecting the  greater  part  of  the  people  of  Abraham 
and  Moses.  This— faithfulness  to  His  own 
declared  principles — is  what  St.  Paul  here  means 
by  His  righteousness.  And  as  it  was  God's 
declared  principle  to  retain  His  own  liberty  to 
show  mercy  on  men  according  to  His  free  will, 
inside  or  outside  the  chosen  people,  so  on  the 
other  hand  He  retained  His  liberty  to  exhibit  His 
judgement  of  hardening  according  to  His  will, 
inside  or  outside  the  chosen  people.  He  who 
brought  Pharaoh  the  Egyptian  upon  the  stage 


38         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

of  history  ^  as  an  example  of  hardening  judge- 
ment, is  within  His  right  in  doing  the  same  now 
with  (the  mass  of)  the  people  of  His  choice. 
The  liberty  asserted  for  God  is  wholly  consistent 
with  His  being  found,  in  fact,  to  have  '  hardened  * 
those  only  who  have  deserved  hardening  by 
their  own  wilfulness.  It  was  for  such  a  moral 
cause  that  God  hardened  the  hearts  of  the  Jews, 
that  '  seeing  they  might  not  see,  and  hearing 
they  might  not  hear^.'  We  can  feel  no  doubt 
that  some  similar  moral  cause  underlay  the 
hardening  of  Pharaoh.  But  this  is  not  St.  Paul's 
present  point.  All  his  argument  is  directed  to 
asserting  God's  liberty  to  show  mercy  or  harden, 
irrespectively  of  considerations  of  race,  when 
and  where  He  in  His  sovereign  moral  will 
chooses. 

We  should  notice  that  St.  Paul's  method  is 
here,  as  elsewhere,  what  is  called  ideal  or 
abstract,  in  the  sense  that  he  makes  abstraction 

^  In  the  original  the  words  run,  '  For  this  cause  have  I  made 
thee  to  stand,'  i.  e.  probably,  '  I  have  preserved  thy  life  under  the 
plague  of  boils,  and  other  plagues,  in  order  to  make  thee  an  ex- 
ample of  a  more  conspicuous  judgement.'  But  St.  Paul,  departing 
from  the  Greek  Bible,  uses  a  word  '  raised  thee  up,'  which  in 
Pharaoh's  case,  or  in  that  of  Cyrus,  means  to  bring  upon  the 
stage  of  history.  Isa.  xli.  2;  cf.  Jer.  1.  [xxvii  in  the  Greek]  41  ; 
Hab.  i.  6. 

2  See  Matt.  xiii.  14,  15  ;  Mark  iv,  12 ;  John  xii.  40. 


God*s  liberty  to  choose  and  reject    39 

of  a  particular  point  of  view;  and,  apparently 
indifferent  to  being  misunderstood,  substantiates 
his  argument  upon  the  particular  aspect  which 
he  has  taken  apart  from  the  whole  matter  in 
hand,  till  it  is  done  with,  and  then  other  points 
can  be  taken  in  their  turn.  And  he  does  not,  as 
a  modern  writer  would  do,  painfully  correlate 
the  various  aspects  of  the  subject  \ 

By  means  of  the  famous  simile  of  the  potter 
St.  Paul  asserts  two  principles  about  God : 
(i)  that  God  is  free,  and  condescends  to  give 
no  account  to  His  creatures,  in  absolutely  deter- 
mining the  high  or  low  vocations  of  men.  To 
one  man  or  nation  He  gives  five  talents,  to 
another  two,  to  another  one.  He  makes  vessels 
to  honourable  and  vessels  to  (comparatively) 
dishonourable  uses.  He  makes  men  Jews  or 
Assyrians,  Englishmen  or  Hottentots,  at  His 
absolute  discretion.  (2)  That  God  is  absolutely 
free,  when  the  human  material  which  He  is 
moulding  for  His  purposes  proves  intractable, 
to  repudiate  and  reject  what  has,  by  its  refusal 
to  mould,  become  a  '  vessel  of  wrath '  fit  '  to  be 
taken  and  destroyed.'  And  it  is  only  by  a 
voluntary  limitation  of  this  freedom  that  He 
exhibits  long  toleration  with  the  intractable  and 

^  Cf.  vol.  i.  p.  75. 


40         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

obstinate,  and  is  longsuffering  with  them  even 
when  His  wrath  is  ready  and  waiting  to  show 
itself.  These  are  the  two  distinct  points  in  the 
simile  of  the  potter.  We  must  distinguish  care- 
fully between  the  'vessels  destined  for  dishonour' 
— the  '  less  honourable  limbs  '  of  humanity — and 
the  '  vessels  of  wrath/  or  '  vessels  fitted  for 
destruction/  i.  e.  those  which  have  proved  them- 
selves unfit  for  the  vocation  to  which  they  were 
destined  and  have  to  be  rejected.  We  note  that 
St.  Paul  does  not  say  that  God  fitted  vessels  for 
destruction,  but  that  He  bore  long  with  those 
which  had  so  become  fitted.  St.  Paul  never  gives 
us  any  real  justification— if  we  look  at  his  lan- 
guage carefully — for  the  idea  of  any  predestina- 
tion to  rejection,  as  distinct  from  predestination 
to  higher  or  lower  purposes.  And  the  New 
Testament  is  full  of  assurances  that  a  pre- 
destination to  a  low  vocation  in  this  world  may 
be  a  predestination  to  high  glory  in  eternity,  if 
the  humble  calling  is  faithfully  followed. 

It  ought  not  to  be  denied,  however,  that  in  all 
this  passage  St.  Paul's  feet,  as  he  moves  along 
his  argument,  are  dogged  by  the  metaphysical 
difficulty  of  finding  room  for  human  free-will 
inside  the  universal  scope  of  the  divine  action 
and  the  prescience  of  the  divine  wisdom.    This 


God's  liberty  to  choose  and  reject    41 

is  a  perennial  difficulty.  But  St.  Paul  does  not 
touch  it.  He  does  not  even  touch  the  question 
of  whether  God  does  actually  (in  our  sense) 
foreknow  the  final  destiny  of  every  individual, 
and  how  he  will  act  on  each  occasion  ^ ;  he  does 
not  touch  the  question  how  or  how  far  human 
wilfulness  can  be  allowed  to  disturb  the  divine 
order.  In  the  Pharisaic  schools  he  would  cer- 
tainly have  been  brought  up,  as  Josephus  tells 
us,  both  to  'attribute  everything  to  fate  and 
God,*  and  also  to  recognize  that  it  'lay  with 
men  for  the  most  part  to  do  right  or  wrong ' : 
to  believe  that  'everything  was  foreseen,'  and 
also  that  ' free-will  was  given';  or,  as  Josephus 
elsewhere  puts  it  (as  if  it  made  no  difference),  to 
believe  'that  some  things,  but  not  all,  are  the 
work  of  fate,  and  other  things  are  in  men's  own 
power  and  need  not  happen^.'  That  is  to  say, 
he  would  have  been  educated  to  believe  both 
in  predestination  and  in  freedom,  without  any 

'  On  the  meaning  of  divine  foreknowledge  in  St.  Paul  see 
vol.  i.  p.  317. 

2  See  Joseph.  Antiq.  xiii.  5,  9  ;  xviii.  i,  3  ;  Bell.  Jud.  ii.  8,  14. 
Cf.  Schiirer, /^jw's/i  People  (English  trans.),  Div.  ii.  vol.  ii.  pp.14  ff. ; 
James  and  Ryle,  Ps.  of  Solomon,  p.  96.  The  Essenes,  Josephus 
says,  believed  in  fate,  and  not  in  free-will ;  the  Sadducees  in  free- 
will and  not  in  fate ;  but  the  Pharisees  in  both.  No  doubt 
Josephus  is  importing  Greek  philosophical  views  into  his  account 
of  Jewish  parties,  but  substantially  his  account  is  probably  true. 


42         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

special  attempt  to  reconcile  the  two.'  We  can 
tell  for  certain  that  this  inherited  belief  was 
further  moralized  in  St.  Paul's  case  by  his 
enlarged  view  of  the  divine  purpose  as  working 
through  high  and  low  estates  alike,  for  the  final 
good  of  all  men ;  and  by  his  deepened  percep- 
tion of  the  correspondence  with  God's  purpose, 
which,  in  the  exercise  of  our  freedom,  is  required 
of  us.  But,  so  far  as  we  know,  St.  Paul  left  the 
strictly  metaph3^sical  question  exactly  where  he 
found  it— as  an  imperfectly  reconciled  antithesis. 
And  there  perhaps  we  men  shall  always  have  to 
leave  it,  or  at  least  till  we  come  to  know  even  as 
we  are  known. 

In  the  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament, 
with  which  the  section  concludes,  we  notice 
that  St.  Paul  varies  the  original  application  of 
the  passages  from  Hosea.  In  the  prophet  they 
refer  to  the  recovery  of  dejected  and  dishonoured 
Israel,  while  the  apostle  applies  them  to  the 
exaltation  of  the  Gentiles  from  their  low  estate. 
As  is  often  the  case,  while  other  passages  in  the 
prophets  were  there  to  prove  exactly  what  he 
wanted  \  St.  Paul  takes  the  words  which  come 

'  e.  g.  Isa.  xix.  24  ;  Ezek.  xvi.  55.  (The  exaltation  into  the 
fellowship  of  the  chosen  people  of  Egypt,  Assyria,  Sodom,  and 
Samaria.) 


God's  liberty  to  choose  and  reject    43 

into  his  mind  with  a  considerable  latitude  of 
application,  and  without  any  critical  argument. 
Thus,  if  he  makes  somewhat  free  with  the 
particular  texts,  it  is  in  order  to  vindicate  the 
real  teaching  of  the  Old  Testament.  He  has, 
if  not  exact  criticism,  what  is  much  better, 
profound  spiritual  insight. 

The  passages  quoted  from  Isaiah  are  charac- 
teristic and  central.  This  great  prophet  first 
clearly  perceived  that  most  striking  law  of 
human  history — that  progress  comes,  not  mostly 
through  the  majority  of  a  nation,  but  through 
the  faithful  remnant.  It  is  the  few  best  through 
whom  alone  God  can  freely  work.  It  is  the 
best  who  in  the  long  run  determine  the  moral 
level  of  the  nation,  and  either  keep  the  mass  of 
men  around  them  from  corruption,  or,  if  that  is 
impossible,  provide  a  fresh  point  of  departure 
and  hope  in  a  society  now  inevitabl}^,  as  a  whole, 
hastening  to  decay  and  judgement.  'As  a 
terebinth,  and  as  an  oak,  whose  stock  remaineth, 
when  they  are  felled;  so  the  holy  seed  is  the 
stock  thereof^' 

'  Isa.  vi.  13. 


44         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


DIVISION  IV.  §  3.    Chapter  IX.  30-X.  21. 

Lack  of  faith  the  reason  oj  Israel's  rejection. 

What  is  to  be  our  conclusion  then  ?  That 
Gentiles,  men  beyond  the  pale  of  God's 
covenant,  who  made  no  pretension  of  pursu- 
ing righteousness,  all  at  once  laid  hold  on 
righteousness  and  made  it  their  own,  simply 
by  accepting  in  faith  the  divine  offer  which 
came  their  way;  while  Israel,  the  chosen 
people,  devoted  to  pursuing  a  law  of  righteous- 
ness, never  caught  up  with  that  of  which  it  was 
in  pursuit.  The  result  seems  strange  enough. 
But  the  reason  of  it  is  apparent.  Israel  ^  had 
been  put  under  a  divine  election,  which  required 
of  them  the  open  ear,  the  responsive  will,  of 
faith.  But  instead  of  cultivating  this  temper 
of  faith,  they  fastened  upon  the  specified  obser- 

^  I  have  endeavoured  sometimes  in  this  analysis  to  expand 
what  St.  Paul  means  by  '  pursuing  righteousness,'  by  *  works '  and 
by  *  faith,'  in  accordance  with  the  meaning  already  assigned  to 
these  words ;  see  vol.  i.  pp.  7-24. 


Israel  rejected  for  lack  of  faith      45 

varices  of  the  Mosaic  law,  and  blindly  adhered 
to  them,  as  if  God  had  nothing  deeper  or  greater 
to  teach  them,  and  they  had  nothing  deeper  or 
greater  to  receive.  Thus,  when  the  Christ 
came,  with  His  completer  light  and  claims,  they 
would  not  have  Him.  They  wanted  nothing 
further,  nothing  more  than  they  were  accus- 
tomed to.  And  thus  Isaiah's  prophecy  was 
fulfilled,  that  the  Christ,  the  tried  foundation 
stone,  the  destined  security  of  all  who  should 
beHeve  in  Him,  would  turn  out  to  be  a  stone  at 
which  the  chosen  people  should  stumble,  and 
a  rock  on  which  it  should  meet  disaster^  (ix. 

30-33). 

And  here  is  the  pathos  of  the  situation.    Here 

is  what  puts  passion  into  St.  Paul's  desire  and 
his  prayer  for  Israel's  entrance  into  the  great 
deliverance.  It  is  that  they  have  such  a  real 
zeal  for  God,  though  without  any  spiritual 
insight  to  guide  it.  A  real  zeal  for  God!  of 
that  St.  Paul's  own  experience  qualified  him  to 
testify.  But  in  what  sense  without  insight  ?  In 
the  sense  that  with  Jesus  of  Nazareth  there 
appeared  a  divine  righteousness,  which  God 
was  communicating  to  men  ^ ;  but  the  Jews,  pre- 

^  Isa.  viii.  14;  xxviii.  16.     Cf.  Matt.  xi.  6. 
"^  See  above,  vol.  i.  p.  17. 


46         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

occupied  with  maintaining  a  standard  of  right- 
eousness which  they  had  taken  for  their  own — 
which  had  become  identified,  that  is  to  say^  with 
their  own  self-satisfaction  and  pride  of  privilege 
and  independence  of  interference— failed  to  per- 
ceive the  divine  purpose,  and,  in  fact,  refused 
to  submit  themselves  to  it.  For  that  principle 
of  law  which  the  Jews  had  come  to  regard  as 
God's  final  word,  He  really  intended  only  as 
a  temporary  discipline  to  be  brought  to  an  end 
by  the  coming  of  the  Christ,  and  by  the  dis- 
closure of  the  real  righteousness  which,  in 
Christ,  God  should  offer  and  man  should  simply 
accept  in  faith.  Law  and  faith  are  in  sharp 
and  intelligible  contrast.  Under  the  law  of 
works  a  man,  as  Moses  says\  stands  to  pre- 
serve his  Hfe  (or  save  his  soul)  according  as  he 
performs  the  specified  requirements  (as  if  man 
were  an  independent  being  who  could  thus 
stand  over  against  God  on  his  merits).  But  faith, 
attributing  nothing  to  itself,  simply  accepts 
the  offer  of  God,  the  divine  message  of  com- 
passion brought  near  to  it.  Moses  of  old  told 
the  Israelites  ^  that  the  commandment  was  not 

^  Levit.  xviii.  5. 

-  Deut.  XXX.  11-14.  I  have  italicized  the  words  substantially 
reproduced  by  St.  Paul,  but  I  have  quoted  the  whole  passage 
because  its  whole  meaning  is  in  his  mind. 


Israel  rejected  for  lack  of  faith      47 

too  hard  for  them,  neither  was  it  far  off.  It  zvas 
not  in  Jieaven,  that  tliey  sJiould  say,  who  shall  go 
up  for  US  to  heaven,  and  bring  it  unto  us,  and 
make  us  to  hear  it,  that  we  may  do  it  ?  Neither 
was  it  beyond  the  sea,  that  they  should  say,  who 
shatl  go  over  the  sea  for  us,  and  bring  it  unto  us, 
and  make  us  to  hear  it  that  we  may  do  it  ?  But 
the  word  was  very  nigh  unto  them,  in  their  mouth 
and  in  their  heart,  that  they  might  do  it.  These 
words  really  describe  the  character  of  the 
Christian  message  of  faith,  of  which  the  apostles 
are  the  heralds.  Truly  there  is  no  need  for  the 
behever  in  Jesus  to  seek  some  one  to  scale 
heaven  to  reach  a  remote  God,  for  Christ  is 
come  down.  Or  to  descend  into  the  abyss  to 
seek  a  Christ  dead  and  lost,  for  Christ  is 
risen.  The  great  deliverance  is  offered  to  us 
on  very  easy  terms.  A  man  has  only  openly  to 
confess  that  the  human  Jesus  is  really  the 
divine  Lord,  and  heartily  to  believe  that  God 
raised  Him  from  the  dead.  Let  him  heartily 
accept  that  message,  and  the  fellowship  in  the 
divine  righteousness  is  his.  Let  him  pubHcly 
confess  that  creed,  and  the  great  salvation  is 
open  to  him.  It  is  the  old  teaching  of  Isaiah^ — 
if  a  man  but  beheve  (in  the  Christ)  there  is  no 

'  Isa.  xxviii.  i6. 


48         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

^ 

fear  of  his  being  put  to  shame.  And  here  Jews 
and  Greeks  are  all  on  the  same  level  of  need 
and  opportunity.  There  is  over  all  the  same 
Lord  Christ,  with  the  same  inexhaustible  good 
will  towards  all  who  simply  call  on  Him. 
Again  the  old  scripture  testifies  that  it  is  every 
one  who  calls  on  the  name  of  the  Lord  who 
shall  be  saved  ^.  The  conditions  then  are  very 
simple.  To  call  on  the  Lord,  we  may  say,  men 
must  believe  in  Him.  To  have  the  opportunity 
of  beheving  on  Him,  they  must  have  heard 
about  Him.  To  hear  about  Him,  they  need  one 
to  speak  in  His  name.  And  how  can  men 
speak  in  the  name  of  God  except  as  His 
apostles,  as  men  commissioned  and  sent  from 
Him  ?  And  these  terms  we  know  well  enough 
have  all  been  fulfilled.  The  commissioned 
heralds  of  the  good  tidings  of  God  have  gone 
forth,  so  that  all  men  may  hear  and  believe  and 
call  out  to  God.  Truly  Isaiah's  vision  of  the 
welcome  preacher  of  good  tidings^  is  realized 
to-day  (x.  1-15). 

Now  we  have  clear  before  us  the  simplicity  of 
the  gospel,  the  message  to  faith.  And  we  have 
before  us  the  plain  fact  that  the  Israelitish 
people,  preoccupied  with  their  own  temporary 

^  Joel  ii.  3a.  "^  laa.  Hi.  7. 


Israel  rejected  for  lack  of  faith      49 

and  misunderstood  standard  of  the  law,  have 
not  generally  accepted  it.  But  this  is  no  more 
than  Isaiah  led  us  to  expect.  '  Lord/  he  cries, 
'  who  gave  credence  to  our  message  ^  ? '  (Faith, 
you  see,  according  to  the  prophet,  requires  just 
a  listening  to  a  divine  message ;  and  this 
message  has  come  to  men  by  the  preaching 
about  Christ.)  And  can  it  be  pleaded  that  the 
Jews  have  not  had  the  opportunity  of  hearing 
the  message  ?  No,  truly,  as  the  Psalmist  says, 
the  voice  of  God's  messengers  has  gone  over 
all  the  earth,  and  their  words  to  the  end  of  the 
inhabited  world  I  Or  can  it  be  said  that  Israel 
did  not  know  that  a  preaching  to  the  Gentiles 
was  to  be  looked  for?  No,  a  succession  of 
warnings  had  reached  them.  Thus  Moses 
foretold  that  it  should  be  a  nation  which  (reli- 
giously speaking)  was  no  nation,  a  people 
without  understanding,  that  God  would  use  to 
provoke  His  people  to  jealousy,  and  stimulate 
their  emulation  ^.  Again,  Isaiah  uses  startling 
words,  and  declares  that  God  has  been  dis- 
covered by  those  who  never  sought  Him,  and 
revealed  to  those  who  never  asked  for  Him  * — 
that  is  the  Gentiles.    But  the  words  of  Isaiah 

'  Isa.  liii.  I.  "  Ps.  xix.  4. 

^  Deut.  xxxii.  21.         <  *  Isa.  Ixv.  i,  2. 

II.  E 


50         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

that  follow  describe  truly  the  relation  of  God  and 
Israel.  God  has  tenderly  and  persistently  been 
offering  His  love  to  them,  but  they  have  proved 
themselves  only  rebellious  and  full  of  contradic- 
tion (x.  16-21). 

This,  then,  is  the  plain  sun;imary.  Israel  is 
rejected  because,  after  every  offer,  and  with 
every  opportunity,  they  have  refused  God's 
leading,  refused  to  be  docile,  refused  to  believe, 
refused  to  obey. 

What  shall  we  say  then  ?  That  the  Gentiles,  which 
followed  not  after  righteousness,  attained  to  righteous- 
ness, even  the  righteousness  which  is  of  faith  :  but  Israel, 
following  after  a  law  of  righteousness,  did  not  arrive  at 
that  law.  Wherefore  ?  Because  they  sought  it  not  by 
faith,  but  as  it  were  by  works.  They  stumbled  at  the 
stone  of  stumbhng ;  even  as  it  is  written, 

Behold,  I  lay  in  Zion  a  stone  of  stumbling  and  a  rock 

of  offence : 

And  he  that  believeth  on  him  shall  not  be  put  to 

shame. 

Brethren,  my  heart's   desire  and  my  supplication  to 

God  is  for  them,  that  they  may  be  saved.    For  I  bear 

them  witness  that  they  have  a  zeal  for  God,  but  not 

according  to  knowledge.     For  being  ignorant  of  God's 

righteousness,  and  seeking  to  establish  their  own,  they 

did  not  subject  themselves  to  the  righteousness  of  God. 

For  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law  unto  righteousness  to 

every  one  that  believeth.    For  Moses  writeth  that  the 

man  that  doeth  the  righteousness  which  is  of  the  law 

shall  live  thereby.     But  the  righteousness  which  is  of 


Israel  rejected  for  lack  of  faith     51 

faith  saith  thus,  Say  not  in  thy  heart,  Who  shall  ascend 
into  heaven  ?  (that  is,  to  bring  Christ  down  :)  or,  Who 
shall  descend  into  the  abyss  ?  (that  is,  to  bring  Christ  up 
from  the  dead.)  But  what  saith  it  ?  The  word  is  nigh 
thee,  in  thy  mouth,  and  in  thy  heart :  that  is,  the  word  of 
faith,  which  we  preach :  because  if  thou  shalt  confess 
with  thy  mouth  Jesus  as  Lord,  and  shalt  beheve  in  thy 
heart  that  God  raised  him  from  the  dead,  thou  shalt  be 
saved  :  for  with  the  heart  man  believeth  unto  righteous- 
ness ;  and  with  the  mouth  confession  is  made  unto  salva- 
tion. For  the  scripture  saith,  Whosoever  believeth  on 
him  shall  not  be  put  to  shame.  For  there  is  no  distinction 
between  Jew  and  Greek:  for  the  same  Lord  is  Lord  of 
all,  and  is  rich  unto  all  that  call  upon  him  :  for.  Whoso- 
ever shall  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  shall  be  saved. 
How  then  shall  they  call  on  him  in  whom  they  have  not 
believed  ?  and  how  shall  they  believe  in  him  whom  they 
have  not  heard  ?  and  how  shall  they  hear  without  a 
preacher?  and  how  shall  they  preach,  except  they  be 
sent  ?  even  as  it  is  written.  How  beautiful  are  the  feet  of 
them  that  bring  glad  tidings  of  good  things  ! 

But  they  did  not  all  hearken  to  the  glad  tidings.  For 
Isaiah  saith.  Lord,  who  hath  beheved  our  report?  So 
belief  cometh  of  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  word  of 
Christ.    But  I  say,  Did  they  not  hear  ?    Yea,  verily, 

Their  sound  went  out  into  all  the  earth, 

And  their  words  unto  the  ends  of  the  world. 
But  I  say,  Did  Israel  not  know  ?    First  Moses  saith, 

I  will  provoke  you  to  jealousy  with  that  which  is  no 
nation. 

With  a  nation  void  of  understanding  will  I  anger  you. 
And  Isaiah  is  very  bold,  and  saith, 

I  was  found  of  them  that  sought  me  not ; 

I  became  manifest  unto  them  that  asked  not  of  me. 

E  2 


52         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

But  as  to  Israel  he  saith,  All  the  day  long  did  I  spread 
out  my  hands  unto  a  disobedient  and  gainsaying  people. 

In  this  passage  St.  Paul  gives  us  the  other 
side  of  the  question  of  the  rejection  of  the 
IsraeUtes.  God  had  retained  an  absolute  free- 
dom, not  to  be  questioned  by  men,  to  reject 
whom  He  willed.  That  was  the  first  point. 
But  can  we  see  whom  our  God  wills  to  reject, 
or  why  in  particular  He  rejected  (though  not 
finally,  as  will  appear)  the  chosen  people  ?  It 
is  because  they  failed  in  faith.  And  faith  is 
precisely  that  which  is  necessary  to  maintain 
correspondence  with  God — it  is  the  faculty  of 
fellowship  with  Him.  They  failed  because  the 
false  principle  of  justification  by  works  had 
obscured  in  their  minds  the  need  and  meaning 
of  faith.  The  false  principle  meant,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  the  maintaining  an  accepted 
standard  of  conduct  and  divine  service, 
especially  in  outward  matters,  and  for  the  rest 
claiming  to  be  left  alone.  The  accepted  stan- 
dard was  that  which  distinguished  Israel  from 
the  rest  of  the  world,  and  what  they  had  be- 
come accustomed  to.  It  was  a  righteousness  of 
'their  own.'  They  prided  themselves  on  it. 
Their  public  opinion  required  its  observance. 
It  had  come  to  usurp  the  place  of  any  direct 


Israel  rejected  for  lack  of  faith      53 

relationship  to  the  voice  of  God.  They  had  no 
idea  that  God  could  have  anything  more  or 
deeper  to  require  of  them.  They  had  lost 
personal  touch  with  Him.  Therefore  seeking 
to  establish  this,  their  own  righteousness,  they 
failed  to  submit  themselves  to  the  (now  newly 
revealed)  righteousness  of  God  in  Christ.  This 
unprogressiveness  of  the  Jewish  ideal,  this  sub- 
stitution of  the  accepted  standard  under  the 
law  for  the  word  of  God,  on  the  part  of  the 
Pharisees,  the  religious  representatives  of  Israel, 
is  precisely  what  the  pages  of  the  Gospel 
record.  Therefore  the  '  corner  stone  of  sure 
foundation '  for  the  divine  building  became  to 
them  the  stone  on  which  they  stumbled  and  fell. 
And  yet  that  the  law  was  a  temporary  expedient, 
and  not  the  whole  counsel  of  God,  was  the 
deepest  witness  of  the  Old  Testament;  and 
in  being  false  to  the  further  revelation  of  the 
will  of  God  in  Christ,  they  were  false  to  their 
own  deepest  principles.  All  this  ground  we 
have  gone  over  already,  and  need  not  traverse 
again  ^ 

So  also  we  have  already  become  familiar 
with  the  simplicity  of  the  message  of  God  in 
Christ,   and  the  simplicity  of  the  faith  which, 

'  See  vol.  i.  pp.  7  ff.,  165  f.,  250  ff. 


54         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

rooted  in  the  consciousness  of  sin  and  need, 
and  equally  possible  for  all  men  who  can 
share  this  consciousness,  is  required  to  wel- 
come God's  offer,  and  so  be  brought  by 
Christ  into  living  union  with  Him.  All  this 
St.  Paul  has  already  elaborated,  and  is  here  only 
resuming  and  recapitulating  by  the  way.  But 
one  or  two  points  in  the  recapitulation  require 
notice. 

I.  St.  Paul  takes  the  basis  of  his  statement 
of  the  principle  of  grace  and  faith  out  of  the 
heart  of  the  books  of  Moses — the  idea  of  the 
^word  very  nig'i  thee,'  of  the  simple  message 
claiming  only  to  be  simply  accepted,  and  of  the 
'very  present  h-^lp'  of  a  gracious  God  needing 
only  to  be  welc  )med.  The  fact  is  that  St.  Paul 
usually  idealizes  when  he  treats  of  '  the  law  of 
Moses';  as,  for  example,  when  he  here  says 
that  '  Moses  writeth  that  the  man  that  doeth  the 
righteousness  .  .  .  shall  live  thereby,'  as  if  that 
was  all  that  Moses  said.  The  principle  of  law,  as 
Saul  the  Pharisee  had  learned  to  understand  it,  is 
the  dominant  principle  in  the  five  Books  of  the 
Law,  but  not  the  only  one.  '  Grace,  already  exist- 
ing in  the  Jewish  theocracy,  was  the  fruitful  germ 
deposited  under  the  surface,  which  was  one  day 
to  burst  forth  and  become  the  peculiar  character 


Israel  rejected  for  lack  of  faith      55 

of  the  new  covenant  ^!  The  God  of  the  new 
covenant  is  the  God  also  of  the  old,  and  was 
there  already  intimating  His  truer  and  deeper 
character.  To  this  St.  Paul  bears  witness  by 
resting  his  statement  of  the  principle  of  the  new 
covenant  upon  the  words  of  the  old. 

2.  In  this  passage  we  have  the  germ  of  what 
we  call  the  creed.  The  lordship  of  Jesus,  in 
the  sense  which  implies  His  proper  divinity,  and 
His  resurrection  and  triumph  over  death — was 
already  matter  of  public  confession  in  the 
Christian  church :  to  make  profession  that 
'Jesus  is  Lord'  qualified  for  'the  salvation^': 
and  in  this  lay  hid  all  that  is  essential  to  the 
Christian  creed.  Already  then  in  the  earliest 
church  subjective  faith  involved  a  certain  objec- 
tive and  public  creed  ^  which  came  very  soon  to 
be  called  '  the  faith.'  In  this  passage  also,  as  in 
xiv.  9  and  in  St.  Peter's  epistle,  we  recognize,  as 
an  element  in  the  common  tradition,  the  behef 
in  the  Descent  into  Hades  (the  abyss). 

3.  St.  Paul  incidentally  shows  us  his  instinc- 

^  Godet  in  loc. 

2  Cf.  r  Cor.  xii.  3.  The  lordship  of  Jesus,  we  see  in  this  passage, 
means  that  He  can  have  applied  to  Him  the  sayings  of  the  Old 
Testament  about  the  Lord  Jehovah  ;  and  can  be  *  called  upon '  as 
such  in  prayer  (Joel  ii.  32). 

2  Cf.  I  Cor.  XV.  1-3. 


56         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

tive  feeling  that  to  be  a  trustworthy  ambassador 
for  God  one  needs  '  apostolate/  '  How  shall 
they  preach  except  they  be  sent^'  And  this 
apostolate,  as  he  uses  it,  means  not  only  an 
inward  sense  of  mission,  but  an  external  sending 
by  Christ  Himself;  and  in  pursuance  of  the 
same  principle,  when  once  the  Church  has  been 
established,  it  would  mean  a  sending  by  those 
authorized  to  send  in  His  name.  This  is  the 
root  principle  of  the  Christian  'stewardship.' 
As  the  subapostolic  Clement  expresses  it, '  Christ 
(was  sent)  from  God,  and  the  apostles  from 
Christ.  Each  came  in  due  order  from  the  will 
of  God.  Therefore,  having  received  the  words 
of  command,  and  having  been  fully  convinced 
by  the  resurrection  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
and  been  assured  in  the  message  of  God  with 
conviction  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  they  came  forth, 
preaching  the  gospel  that  the  kingdom  of  God 
was  to  come.  Therefore  as  they  preached  in 
country  and  towns  they  established  their  first- 
fruits,  when  they  had  put  them  to  the  proof,  to 
be  bishops  (i.  e.  presbyters),  and  deacons  of  those 
who  were  to  come  to  the  faith.'  And  afterwards, 
in  view  of  disputes  over  the  presbyterial  office, 
which  divine  inspiration  enabled  them  to  antici- 
pate, they  made  provision  for  a  due  succession 


Israel  rejected  for  lack  of  faith      57 

in  the  '  episcopate '  on  the  death  of  those  first 
appointed^. 

4.  St.  Paul's  singularly  free,  but  deeply  in- 
spired, manner  of  applying  texts  from  the  Old 
Testament  is  especially  illustrated  in  this 
passage. 

Thus  the  passages  quoted  from  Isaiah  about 
the  Stone,  which  St.  Paul  applies  to  Christ, 
refer  originally  to  Jehovah  simply  in  one  case 
(Isa.  viii.  14),  and  probably  to  His  will  and  cove- 
nant as  the  foundation  of  Israel's  polity  in  the 
other  (Isa.  xxviii.  16).  Jewish  tradition  had 
possibly  already  referred  them  to  the  Christ  ^ ; 
and  certainly  our  Lord's  use  of  Ps.  cxviii.  22 — 
'The  stone  which  the  builders  rejected' — as 
applying  to  His  own  rejection,  made  the  refer- 
ence more  obvious.  It  is  indeed  in  deepest 
accordance  with  the  spirit  of  Isaiah :  and 
St.  Peter  (i  Peter  ii.  6),  we  notice,  follows 
St.  Paul  in  the  use  of  them.  Another  passage 
(Hi.  7)  about  '  the  feet  of  those  who  preach  good 
tidings '  is  transferred,  with  added  meaning,  from 
the  heralds  of  the  redemption  from  Babylon, 
to  the  heralds  of  the  greater  redemption.  And 
the  opening  of  chapter  Ixv,  which  originally 
refers  altogether  to  apostate  Israel,  is  divided, 

'  Clem,  ad  Cor.  42,  44.  ^  See  S.  and  H.  in  he. 


58         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

and  applied  in  part  to  the  Gentiles,  in  part  to 
the  Jews.  (Other  passages  in  the  prophets, 
we  should  observ^e,  would  justify  the  former 
application.)  Again,  a  passage  from  Ps.  xix  is 
transferred  very  beautifully  from  the  witness  of 
the  heavens  to  the  witness  of  the  Gospel ;  as  if 
St.  Paul  would  say— grace  is  become  as  univer- 
sal as  nature.  The  language  of  a  passage  from 
Deuteronomy,  as  we  have  seen,  is  taken  from 
the  law^  to  express  the  spirit  of  the  gospel. 
The  calHng  upon  Jehovah  in  Joel  becomes  in 
St.  Paul's  quotation  the  calling  upon  Christ. 
All  this  free  citation,  uncritical  according  to  our 
ideas  and  methods,  yet  rests  upon  a  profoundly 
right  apprehension  of  the  meaning  of  the  Old 
Testament  as  a  whole.  The  appeal  to  the  Old 
Testament,  even  if  not  to  the  particular  passage, 
is  justified  by  the  strictest  criticism. 


But  not  all  rejected^  nor  finally     59 


DIVISION  IV.  §  4.    Chapter  XL  1-12. 

God's  judgement  on  Israel  neither  universal 
nor  final. 

But  if  Israel  has  thus  by  her  own  fault  fallen 
from  her  high  estate,  are  we  then  to  suppose 
that  God  has  simply  rejected  His  own  chosen 
people  ?  Such  a  thought  cannot  be  entertained. 
How  could  it  have  been  in  the  mind  of  such 
an  Israehte  as  St.  Paul,  one  who  came  of 
Abraham's  genuine  seed,  and  of  the  tribe  which 
held  so  fast  by  Judah  ?  No  :  the  people  on  whom 
from  eternity  God's  eye  rested,  to  mark  them 
out  for  Himself  and  for  His  purposes,  assuredly 
cannot,  as  a  people,  have  been  cast  away  ^.  What 
has  happened  now  is  only  what  is  recorded  long 
ago  in  the  history  of  Elijah.  Then,  as  now,  a 
general  unfaithfulness  in  the  bulk  of  the  nation 
concealed  the  existence  of  a  faithful  remnant. 
Yet    God    had,    as    He    assured   the   prophet, 

^  Three  times— i  Sam.  xii.  22,  Ps.  xciv.  14,  xcv.  3  (in  the  Greek) 
—the  promise  occurs  '  The  Lord  will  not  cast  away  His  people.' 


6o         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

reserved  for  Himself  such  a  remnant,  and  of 
very  considerable  numbers.  And  now  also  such 
a  remnant  of  true  Israelites  exists  in  accordance 
with  the  selective  action  of  grace — that  is  to  say, 
God's  gratuitous  and  unmerited  good  will.  Yes  : 
let  there  be  no  mistake  about  it ;  their  position 
is  due  to  nothing  else  than  the  original  and 
continuous  action  of  God's  grace;  and  grace 
means  God's  absolutely  gratuitous  and  unmerited 
good  will  (which  may  therefore  come  upon  Gen- 
tiles equally  with  Jews).  It  excludes  the  idea  of 
these  remnants  owing  their  position  to  previous 
merits,  or  of  its  being  in  any  way  God's  response 
to  an  antecedent  claim  ^. 

This  then  is  what  we  have  to  recognize. 
What  Israel  in  bulk  sought  for  (by  way  of  its 
supposed  merit),  that  it  did  not  get,  but  a  select 
remnant  got  it ;  and  upon  the  rest  there  fell  that 
judicial  hardening — that  reversal  of  their  true 
relation  to  God— which  Moses  and  Isaiah  already 
discerned  in  the  chosen  people^:    an  abiding 

'  The  vocation  and  election  which  made  Israel  the  chosen 
people  were  absolutely  of  God.  What  distinguished  the  faithful 
remnant  from  the  bulk  of  the  nation  was  simply  that  they  had  not 
altogether  failed  in  faith,  so  that  the  unchanging  election  was  not 
in  their  cases  practically  suspended,  but  God  *  reserved  them  for 
Himself/ 

^  St.  Paul  refers  chiefly  to  Isa.  xxix.  lo — the  description  of  a 
besotted   people  whose  prophets  are  eyes  that  cannot  see,  and 


But  not  all  rejected^  nor  finally     6i 

stupor,  and  deafness,  and  blindness,  with  regard 
to  God's  purpose  and  will  for  them.  David  too, 
as  God's  righteous  servant,  demands,  as  a  divine 
requital  upon  his  bitter  and  cruel  enemies,  that 
their  very  abundance  should  betray  them  into 
captivity  and  prove  their  stumblingblock ;  that 
their  spiritual  vision  should  be  lost  and  their 
backs  bent  downward  to  the  ground.  Which  is 
just  what  has  happened  to  Israel  through  their 
rejection  of  the  Son  of  David. 

The  bulk  of  the  people  then  has  stumbled. 
But  we  must  not  exaggerate  what  has  happened. 
As  it  is  not  all  of  them  who  have  stumbled,  so 
also  it  is  not  for  ever.  Their  stumbling  is  not 
equivalent  to  a  final  fall.  Already  we  can  per- 
ceive how  it  may  be  reversed.  The  refusal  of 
the  Jews  to  recognize  the  Christ  has  been  the 
occasion  for  a  turning  to  the  Gentiles.  Thus 
the  salvation  of  the  Christ  has  come  to  them. 
And  this  has  happened  in  the  divine  providence 
in  order  that,  as  Moses  anticipated,  they  may 
in  their  turn  provoke  the  Jews  to  jealousy— to 
a  jealous  determination  not  to  lose  their  old 


their  seers  ears  that  cannot  hear ;  so  that  the  word  of  God  has 
become  as  a  sealed  book ;  cf.  also  Isa.  vi.  9.  But  there  is  a  similar 
passage  in  Deut.  xxix.  4,  which  partly  moulds  his  language,  and 
supplies  the  words  *  unto  this  day.* 


62         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

privileges.  Thus  if  even  the  transgression  of 
Israel  has  proved  the  occasion  for  enriching 
the  world  as  a  whole,  if  even  the  deficiency  of 
Israel  (leaving  vacant  space,  as  it  were,  in  the 
Church)  has  proved  the  occasion  for  enriching 
the  Gentiles,  how  much  more  enrichment  is  to  be 
expected  when  the  chosen  people  are  recovered 
in  their  full  number  ? 

I  say  then,  Did  God  cast  off  his  people  ?  God  forbid. 
For  I  also  am  an  Israelite,  of  the  seed  of  Abraham,  of  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin.  God  did  not  cast  off  his  people  which 
he  foreknew.  Or  wot  ye  not  what  the  scripture  saith  of 
Elijah  ^  ?  how  he  pleadeth  with  God  against  Israel,  Lord, 
they  have  killed  thy  prophets,  they  have  digged  down 
thine  altars  :  and  I  am  left  alone,  and  they  seek  my  life. 
But  what  saith  the  answer  of  God  unto  him  ?  I  have  left 
for  myself  seven  thousand  men,  who  have  not  bowed  the 
knee  to  Baal.  Even  so  then  at  this  present  time  also 
there  is  a  remnant  according  to  the  election  of  grace. 
But  if  it  is  by  grace,  it  is  no  more  of  works :  otherwise 
grace  is  no  more  grace.  What  then  ?  That  which  Israel 
seeketh  for,  that  he  obtained  not;  but  the  election  ob- 
tained it,  and  the  rest  were  hardened  :  according  as  it  is 
written,  God  gave  them  a  spirit  of  stupor,  eyes  that  they 
should  not  see,  and  ears  that  they  should  not  hear,  unto 
this  very  day.    And  David  saith. 

Let  their  table  be  made  a  snare,  and  a  trap, 

And  a  stumblingblock,  and  a  recompense  unto  them: 

^  Rather,  as  margin,  in   Elijah,  i.e.  the  passage   of  Scripture 
about  Elijah. 


But  not  all  rejected,  nor  finally     63 

Let  their  eyes  be  darkened,  that  they  may  not  see, 

And  bow  thou  down  their  back  alway. 
I  say  then.  Did  they  stumble  that  they  might  fall  ?  God 
forbid :  but  by  their  fall  salvation  is  come  unto  the  Gen- 
tiles, for  to  provoke  them  to  jealousy.  Now  if  their  fall 
is  the  riches  of  the  world,  and  their  loss  the  riches  of  the 
Gentiles  ;  how  much  more  their  fulness  ? 

I.  We  learn  a  little  more  exactly  about 
St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  election  in  this  chapter. 
God's  final  purpose  for  good  is,  as  we  shall 
see  at  the  end  of  the  chapter— and  in  what 
sense  we  shall  have  to  consider — upon  all  men 
whatsoever.  But  this  universal  purpose  is 
worked  out  through  special '  elect '  instruments. 
Thus  God  recognized^  Israel  beforehand,  i.  e.  in 
His  eternal  counsels,  as  the  people  to  bear 
His  name  in  the  world.  This  was  the  selection 
of  Israel,  and  was  an  act  of  which  the  initiative 
was  wholly  on  God's  side.  It  was  a  pure  act 
of  the  divine  favour.  This  '  selection  of  grace ' 
was  upon  Israel  as  a  whole,  but  at  later  stages 
of  the  history,  frequently  enough,  owing  to  the 
disobedience  and  apostasy  of  the  majority,  it  is 
found  to  rest  in  an  effective  sense  only  upon 
a  '  remnant '  whom  God  has  reserved  for  Him- 
self, because  they  have  not  utterly  refused  to 

*  This — to  recognize  or  mark  out  beforehand — is  the  meaning 

of  divine  'foreknowing'  in  St.  Paul.     See  vol.  i.  pp.  317  f. 


64         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

correspond  to  the  original  and  continuous  call 
of  the  divine  grace.  For  the  rest  their  privileges 
become  the  occasion  of  their  fall :  their  light 
becomes  their  darkness.  For  judgement  always 
and  inevitably  waits  upon  any  form  of  misused 
privilege.  Thus,  when  the  Christ  came,  only  an 
elect  remnant  of  the  nation  welcomed  Him.  The 
rest  fell  under  judgement.  But  God  overrules 
even  this  apostasy.  He  takes  the  opportunity 
of  the  absence  of  those  who  should  have  been 
at  the  marriage  supper  of  the  king's  son,  to 
fill  the  great  vacancy  from  the  Gentile  world. 
They  are  brought  within  the  scope  of  the 
selecting  call.  But  God's  original  vocation  is 
still  irrevocably  upon  apostate  Israel.  The 
new  Gentile  converts  are  to  stimulate  them  to 
recover  their  lost  privileges.  Their  wilfulness 
and  obstinacy  is  to  give  place  to  humihty  and 
faith;  and  Jew  and  Gentile  all  together  are 
to  constitute  the  elect  catholic  church. 

This  is  very  simple  and  cheerful  teaching. 
It  leaves  for  us  to  consider  later  the  question 
whether  God's  original  and  special  vocation 
resting  upon  the  Jews  is  finally  to  constrain 
them  all  to  conversion,  and  whether  in  the  same 
way  His  ultimate  purpose  of  salvation  for  all 
men  is  to  take  place  infallibly  in  all  cases.    This 


But  not  all  rejected^  nor  finally     65 

question  is  still  to  be  considered.  But  at  any 
rate  the  doctrine  of  election  has  lost  all  that 
gave  it  a  colouring  of  arbitrariness  and  injustice 
and  narrow  sympathies. 

We  ought  to  notice  in  the  above  passage  how 
St.  Paul,  in  recalling  the  continual  obstinacy  and 
hardening  of  the  majority  of  the  chosen  people, 
is  following  on  the  lines  of  St.  Stephen's  speech 
(Acts  vii.  51). 

2.  The  imprecatory  psalms  are,  especially  in 
our  Anglican  public  services,  a  great  stumbling- 
block  to  many — especially  the  69th  (here  cited 
by  St.  Paul)  and  the  109th.  These  psalms  do 
not  represent  barely  the  cry  of  an  individual 
sufferer  invoking  God's  curse  upon  his  private 
enemies.  The  sufferer,  who  is  the  psalmist, 
or  with  whom  at  least  the  psalmist  identi- 
fies himself,  represents  afflicted  righteousness. 
It  is  God's  people,  His  'servant'  and  'son' 
according  to  the  language  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, that  is  under  persecution  from  the 
enemies  of  God.  And  he  calls  upon  God  to 
vindicate  Himself  by  punishing  the  adversary ; 
to  let  it  be  seen  that  His  word  and  promise  is 
truth.  '  How  long,  O  God,  holy  and  true,  dost 
thou  not  judge  and  avenge  ?  *  Even  from  this 
point  of  view,  however,  when  with  the  assistance 

II.  F 


66  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

of  the  modern  critics  we  have  in  the  main  purged 
away  the  element  of  private  vindictiveness,  these 
psalms  no  doubt  remain  with  -the  stamp  of 
narrowness  and  bitterness  upon  them.  They 
have  none  of  the  larger  New  Testament  sense 
that  the  worst  enemies  of  the  Church  may  be 
converted  and  live :  that  our  attitude  towards  all 
men  is  to  wish  them  good,  purely  good  and 
not  evil,  even  though  it  be  under  the  form  of 
judgement:  '  Rejoice  when  men  revile  you  and 
persecute  you ' ;  '  Bless  them  that  curse  you, 
do  good  to  them  that  hate  you,  pray  for  them 
which  despitefully  use  you ' ;  '  That  by  your 
good  works  which  they  shall  behold,  they  may 
glorify  God  in  the  day  of  visitation/ 

But  granted  the  limitation  and  bitterness  still 
remaining  in  these  psalms,  their  citation  in 
the  New  Testament  shows  us  what  is  for  us 
the  right  use  of  them.  They  are  by  implica- 
tion taken  up — where  we  should  least  expect 
them — into  the  mouth  of  the  Son  of  Man  \ 
That  is  to  say,  it  is  His  enemies  on  whom  the 
judgements  are  imprecated.  There  is  a  wrath 
of  the  Lamb.  There  is  a  divine  sword  of  judge- 
ment which  proceeds  out  of  His  mouth.  He, 
the  administrator  of  the  righteousness  of  God, 

'  Both  in  this  passage  and  in  Acts  i.  20. 


But  not  all  rejected,  nor  finally     67 

expects  from  His  Father  judgement  on  His 
enemies.  It  is  not  necessarily,  as  St.  Paul 
here  indicates,  final  judgement :  the  judgement 
upon  the  Jews  was  not  yet  that;  but  judge- 
ment of  some  sort — temporal  or  final — upon 
His  wilful  adversaries,  the  Son  expects  of  the 
Father.  And  we  men,  as  we  repeat  these 
psalms,  are,  like  the  first  Christians  in  face 
of  the  suicide-  of  Judas,  to  identify  ourselves 
with  the  divine  righteousness  and  accept  the 
law  of  just  retribution.  This  is  the  deepest  and 
truest  sense  in  which  we  can  still  say  the  impre- 
catory psalms ;  and  in  these  days  of  a  philan- 
thropy that  often  lacks  the  stern  savour  of 
righteousness,  it  is  very  necessary  that  we 
should  make  this  sense  our  own. 


F2 


68  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


DIVISION  IV.  §  5^    Chapter  XI.  13-36. 

GocCs  present  purpose  for  the  Jews  through  the 
Gentiles :    and  so  for  all  humanity. 

St.  Paul  would  not  have  it  supposed  that, 
in  his  zeal  for  the  recovery  of  Israel,  he  was 
proving  faithless  to  his  vocation  as  the  apostle 
of  the  Gentiles.  On  the  contrary,  he  explains 
(assuming  the  Roman  Christians  to  be  Gentiles 
in  the  mass)  that  he  is,  by  this  very  zeal,  fulfiUing 
that  vocation.  The  conversion  of  the  Gentiles 
was  meant  to  react  as  a  stimulus  on  the  Jews. 
When  St.  Paul  magnifies  his  Gentile  ministry, 
he  does  so  always  with  the  motive  of  stinging 
the  jealousy  of  his  own  people,  and  so  bringing 
some  of  them  to  salvation.  How  can  such  a 
consummation  be  too  eagerly  desired?  For  if 
even  so  pitiable  an  event  as  their  rejection  has 
yet,  in  God's  providence,  been   overruled  for 

■  I  follow,  by  preference,  the  paragraphs  of  the  R,V.,  unless 
there  is  very  strong  reason  to  the  contrary. 


A  purpose  of  love  for  all  mankind  69 

a  good  end— the  bringing  back  of  the  outside 
world  into  the  fellowship  of  God^:  can  we 
doubt  that  so  happy  an  event  as  their  recovery 
would  be  indeed  (what  Ezekiel  saw  in  vision 
in  the  valley  of  the  dry  bones)  a  veritable 
resurrection?  For  the  consecration  of  God  is 
still  upon  them.  The  holy  (i.e.  consecrated) 
people  they  still  remain.  As  the  'heave  offer- 
ing '  of  the  '  first  of  the  dough  ^ '  consecrates  the 
whole  lump,  so  the  first  of  the  nation  offered  to 
God — Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob— have  conse- 
crated the  whole  nation.  The  holiness  of  the 
root  of  God's  olive  tree  ^  has  passed  to  the  latest 
branches.  It  is  quite  true  that  some  of  these 
branches  of  the  Jewish  olive  tree  were  broken 
off,  and  that  the  Gentiles  were  introduced  in 
their  place ;  like  a  wild  olive  grafted  upon  the 
root  of  a  cultivated  plant,  and  so  sharing  its  rich 
sap.  But  that — to  let  the  metaphor  continue — 
gives  the  wild  olive  no  ground  for  an  insolent 
contenlpt  of  the  branches  which  naturally  be- 
longed to  the  tree.  What  advantage  it  now 
has   it  wholly  derives  from    that  which    it    is 

1  Cf.  2  Cor.  V.  19,  '  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world 
unto  Himself.' 

^  Num.  XV.  20j  21. 

"  *  The  Lord  called  thy  name  A  green  olive  tree.'  Jer.  xi.  i6 ; 
Hos.  xiv.  6. 


70         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

affecting  to  despise.  It  is  the  root  that  supports 
it,  not  it  the  root.  And  are  the  Gentiles  dis- 
posed to  argue  that  these  rejected  Jewish 
branches  were  broken  off  in  order  that  they 
might  take  their  place ;  and  that  they,  the 
Gentiles,  are  thus  plainly  preferred  by  God 
to  the  Jews?  The  answer  is  plain.  Why  were 
they  broken  off?  Because  they  would  not  main- 
tain the  correspondence  of  faith  with  the  purpose 
of  God;  and  it  is  simply  by  maintaining  this 
attitude  that  the  newly  introduced  Gentiles  can 
hope  to  retain  their  place.  They  had  better 
exhibit,  not  a  groundless  pride,  but  a  reasonable 
fear.  Is  God  likely  to  be  more  sparing  towards 
them  than  towards  His  first  chosen  ?  God  has 
displayed  before  their  eyes  both  His  attributes 
of  severity  and  goodness,  and  they  must  take 
note  of  both.  At  the  present  moment  it  is 
severity  towards  Jews,  goodness  towards  Gen- 
tiles. Yes,  goodness  towards  Gentiles ;  but  so 
long  only  as  they  abide  faithfully  in  His  good- 
ness, no  longer.  When  they  fail  of  faithfulness, 
they  too,  like  their  Jewish  predecessors,  shall 
be  cut  off.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  when  those 
Jews  change  their  attitude,  and  their  hardness 
melts  and  faith  returns,  they  shall  be  recovered 
and  reingrafted  into  the  old  olive  tree.     If  God 


A  purpose  of  love  for  all  mankind  71 

could  graft  into  it  branches  cut  out  of  an  alien 
and  inferior  stock,  how  much  more  easily  can 
He  reingraft  into  it  what  is  really  part  of  its 
very  self? 

Here  then  we  have  a  real  disclosure  of  a 
divine  secret  ^  to  which  the  Gentiles  would  do 
well  to  keep  their  eyes  open,  lest  (hke  the  Jews 
before  them)  they  mistake  for  wisdom  their  own 
self-conceit.  The  hardening  of  the  Jews  has 
been  used  by  God  as  an  opportunity  for  the 
gathering  in  of  the  full  number  of  the  nations  of 
the  earth ;  and  that  with  the  further  purpose 
that,  when  the  nations  are  gathered  in,  Israel  in 
all  its  completeness  should  be  recovered  too. 
And  so  shall  be  fulfilled  Isaiah's  prophecy  of 
a  redeemer  from  Zion,  who  should  restore 
Israel,  and  of  a  new  covenant  with  them,  based 
on  a  fresh  forgiveness  of  their  sins  2.  Thus  if 
we  think  of  the  actual  relation  of  the  Jews  to  the 
present  preaching  of  the  Gogpel,  we  must  think 
of  them  as  God's  enemies,  and  as  having  by 
their  very  enmity  secured  the  Gentiles  their 
opportunity ;  but  if  we  think  of  them  in  relation 

'  On  *  mystery,'  see  Ephesians,  p.  73.  It  means  a  divine  secret 
disclosed  to  the  elect. 

-  Isa.  lix.  20,  according  to  the  Greek,  and  xxvii.  9.  Cf.  Ezek. 
xxxvi.  25,  26. 


72         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

to  God's  eternal  choice,  they  still  must  appear 
as  sharing  the  divine  love  which  rests  on  the 
people  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob.  God's 
gifts  and  vocation  do  not  admit  of  being  re- 
pented of  and  recalled.  Thus  we  know  what  to 
expect.  As  the  Gentiles  passed  out  from  dis- 
obedience under  the  divine  compassion  through 
the  opportunity  afforded  by  the  disobedience  of 
the  Jews  ;  so  now  the  divine  compassion  which 
rests  on  the  Gentiles  is  intended  (by  stimulating 
the  Jews  to  recover  their  lost  privileges)  to 
prove  the  means  of  recovering  them  too  out  of 
their  disobedience  into  the  shelter  of  the  divine 
compassion  which  is  the  common  heritage  of  all. 
We  see,  in  fact,  all  men  in  turn  shut  up  in  dis- 
obedience to  God,  as  in  a  prison  house  :  it  is 
God  who  has  so  shut  them  up  ;  but  it  is  done  in 
view  of  the  largest  and  most  compassionate 
purpose  which  can  be  even  conceived.  It  is  done 
that  (when  men  have  become  wearied  of  their 
own  wilfulness,  and  have  experienced  their  own 
need)  the  divine  mercy  may  welcome  and 
embrace  all  alike  at  last. 

And  if  this  is  the  purpose  of  God  disclosed  to 
us,  how  can  we  fail  to  adore  the  fathomless 
resourcefulness  of  His  wisdom  in  determining 
how  to  act,  and  His  skill  in  executing  what  He 


A  purpose  of  love  for  all  mankind  73 

has  determined  ?  How  can  we  fail  to  recognize 
our  utter  incompetence  to  explore  His  judge- 
ment, or  track  out  His  ways  ?  Like  inspired 
men  of  old  ^  we  must  recognize  that  the  absolute 
initiative  is  His,  and  our  only  reasonable  attitude 
the  humblest  correspondence.  Truly  in  counsel 
and  operation  we  have  contributed  to  God 
nothing  of  our  own :  we  have  no  claim  with 
which  to  approach  Him.  He  is  the  unique 
source  of  whatever  is,  and  the  sole  executor  of 
whatever  takes  place,  and  the  only  end  to  which 
all  things  tend :  and  to  Him,  therefore,  alone  all 
praise  is  due,  and  shall  be  given. 

But  I  speak  to  you  that  are  Gentiles.  Inasmuch  then 
as  I  am  an  apostle  of  Gentiles,  I  glorify  my  ministry : 
if  by  any  means  I  may  provoke  to  jealousy  them  that  are 
my  flesh,  and  may  save  some  of  them.  For  if  the  casting 
away  of  them  is  the  reconciling  of  the  world,  what  shall 
the  receiving  of  them  be,  but  life  from  the  dead  ?  And 
if  the  firstfruit  is  holy,  so  is  the  lump :  and  if  the  root 
is  holy,  so  are  the  branches.  But  if  some  of  the  branches 
were  broken  off,  and  thou,  being  a  wild  olive,  wast  grafted 
in  among  them,  and  didst  become  partaker  with  them  of 
the  root  of  the  fatness  of  the  ohve  tree ;  glory  not  over 
the  branches  :  but  if  thou  gloriest,  it  is  not  thou  that  bear- 
est  the  root,  but  the  root  thee.  Thou  wilt  say  then. 
Branches  were  broken  off,  that  I  might  be  grafted  in. 
Well ;  by  their  unbehef  they  were  broken  off,  and  thou 
standest  by  thy  faith.     Be  not  highminded,  but  fear :    for 

^  Isa.  xl.  13.     Cf.  Job  xxxviii.  4  ;  xli.  11  ;  Wisd.  ix.  13, 


74         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

if  God  spared  not  the  natural  branches,  neither  will  he 
spare  thee.  Behold  then  the  goodness  and  severity  of 
God  :  toward  them  that  fell,  severity ;  but  toward  thee, 
God's  goodness,  if  thou  continue  in  his  goodness :  other- 
wise thou  also  shalt  be  cut  off.  And  they  also,  if  they 
continue  not  in  their  unbelief,  shall  be  grafted  in  :  for 
God  is  able  to  graft  them  in  again.  For  if  thou  wast  cut 
out  of  that  which  is  by  nature  a  wild  olive  tree,  and  wast 
grafted  contrary  to  nature  into  a  good  olive  tree:  how 
much  more  shall  these,  which  are  the  natural  branches, 
be  grafted  into  their  own  olive  tree  ? 

For  I  would  not,  brethren,  have  you  ignorant  of  this 
mystery,  lest  ye  be  wise  in  your  own  conceits,  that 
a  hardening  in  part  hath  befallen  Israel,  until  the  fulness 
of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in;  and  so  all  Israel  shall  be 
saved,  even  as  it  is  written, 

There  shall  come  out  of  Zion  the  Deliverer; 

He  shall  turn  away  ungodliness  from  Jacob  : 

And  this  is  my  covenant  unto  them, 

When  I  shall  take  away  their  sins. 
As  touching  the  gospel,  they  are  enemies  for  your  sake  : 
but  as  touching  the  election,  they  are  beloved  for  the 
fathers'  sake.  For  the  gifts  and  the  calHng  of  God  are 
without  repentance.  For  as  ye  in  time  past  were  dis- 
obedient to  God,  but  now  have  obtained  mercy  by  their 
disobedience,  even  so  have  these  also  now  been  disobe- 
dient, that  by  the  mercy  shewn  to  you  they  also  may  now 
obtain  mercy.  For  God  hath  shut  up  all  unto  disobedience, 
that  he  might  have  mercy  upon  all. 

O  the  depth  of  the  riches  both  of  the  wisdom  and  the 
knowledge  of  God !  how  unsearchable  are  his  judgements, 
and  his  ways  past  tracing  out !  For  who  hath  known  the 
mind  of  the  Lord  ?  or  who  hath  been  his  counsellor  1  or 
who  hath  first  given  to  him,  and  it  shall  be  recompensed 


A  purpose  of  love  for  all  mankind  75 

unto  him  again  ?     For  of  him,  and  through  him,  and  unto 
him,  are  all  things.    To  him  he  the  glory  for  ever.    Amen. 

I.  There  is  a  true  patriotism  which  must  at 
times  be  content  to  wear  the  guise  of  disloyalty ; 
and  not  even  Jeremiah  *  weakening  the  hands 
of  the  men  of  war^'  in  the  conflict  with  the  power 
of  Babylon,  while  all  the  time  his  very  heart 
was  bleeding  for  Jerusalem,  presents  a  more 
pathetic  and  moving  picture  of  such  patriotism 
than  does  St.  Paul  as  he  here  shows  himself  to 
us.  While  he  was  shaking  off  the  dust  of  his 
feet,  as  he  left  the  synagogues  to  turn  to  the 
Gentiles,  while  he  was  throwing  all  his  tre- 
mendous energy  into  the  apostolate  of  the 
nations,  and  vindicating  their  cause,  even  to 
fierceness,  against  the  narrowness  of  his  own 
nation,  all  the  time  the  thought  which  buoyed 
him  up  was  that  when  the  cathohc  church  had 
become  an  established  fact— when  it  should 
have  become  plain,  even  to  Jewish  eyes,  that 
the  elect  people  of  God  is  now  a  fraternity  of  all 
nations,  and  not  their  own  race  only — then  it 
could  not  fail  to  happen,  that  the  members  of 
the  ancient  people,  finding  themselves  in  their 
turn  '  alienated,'  '  strangers,'  and  '  far  off,'  while 

*  Jer.  xxxviii.  4. 


76         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

they  knew  so  well,  and  needed  so-  deeply,  the 
fellowship  of  the  covenant,  should  be  stimulated 
to  resume  their  former  privileges.  Surely 
then  at  last  Israel  '  should  remember  her  way 
and  be  ashamed,'  and  'receive'  her  Gentile 
'sisters,'  though  they  had  been  to  her  as  '  Sodom 
and  Samaria,'  and  though  they  were  now  given 
to  her  for  'daughters,  but  not  by  her  covenant' — 
not  by  any  means  on  her  own  terms  \  All  the 
time  that  St.  Paul  is  fighting  Judaism  and  vindi- 
cating Catholicism,  laying  down  the  lines  of  the 
great  church  of  the  nations,  this  is  the  vision  that 
cheers  him — an  Israel,  penitent,  humbled,  wor- 
shipping the  Christ  whom  she  had  crucified,  and 
therefore  welcomed  back  again  with  the  honour 
due  to  her  great  memories  and  her  inextinguish- 
able vocation.  But  we  notice  by  the  way,  as 
throwing  an  unmistakable  light  on  the  cir- 
cumstances of  Roman  Christianity,  that  while 
St.  Paul  thus  shows  his  own  Jewish  feeling,  he 
speaks  to  the  Roman  Christian  as  in  the  mass 
Gentile  ^. 

2.  If  so  miserable  an  event,  one  so  revolting 
to  the  divine  heart,  as  the  apostasy  of  Israel, 
had  yet  in  the  determinate  counsel  and  fore- 
knowledge  of  God  been    overruled    so  as  to 

^  Ezek.  xvi.  61.  ^  See  above,  vol.  i.  3. 


A  purpose  of  love  for  all  mankind  77 

become  the  occasion  for  the  calHng  of  the 
Gentiles,  it  must  needs  be,  St.  Paul  argues, 
that  an  event  so  dear  to  the  heart  of  God  as 
the  recovery  of  Israel,  would  have  a  result 
even  more  blessed,  nothing  less  than  '  life  from 
the  dead/  What  does  this  last  expression 
mean  ?  Does  St.  Paul  mean  that  when  once 
the  chosen  people  was  recovered  into  a  really 
cathohc  church,  there  would  be  no  further 
delay — the  consummation  would  be  reached, 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead  which  is  to  accom- 
pany the  (second)  coming  of  the  Christ  would 
take  place  at  once?  This  thought  would  be 
very  natural  to  St.  Paul,  and  thoroughly  agree- 
able to  the  old  Messianic  expectation ;  and  it 
would  give,  as  nothing  else  gives  so  well,  the 
needed  climax  to  the  sentence.  Moreover  it 
cannot  be  said  that  the  idea  of  the  resurrection 
was  not  intimately  associated  among  Christians 
with  the  return  of  the  Christ  in  glory.  But,  on 
the  other  hand,  nowhere  else  does  St.  Paul  speak 
of  '  the  resurrection  '  so  absolutely  and  without 
explanation  as  the  goal  of  all  things ;  and,  if  he 
had  meant  so  to  speak  of  it  here,  he  would 
surely  have  said  '  the  resurrection,'  and  not  used 
the  vaguer  expression  *  life  from  the  dead.'  As 
he  has  used  this  we  must  interpret  it  in  terms 


78         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

of  EzekieFs  vision  ^ :  the  recovery  of  Israel 
will  be  nothing  less  than  a  case  of  dead  men 
coming  to  life  again,  of  dry  bones  revivified. 
The  only  drawback  to  this  interpretation  is — 
what  need  not  trouble  us  much — the  failure  of 
rhetorical  climax.  This  revival  of  dead  Israel 
is  hardly  a  greater  thing  than  the  reconciliation 
of  an  ahenated  world.  And,  though  it  would 
improve  the  rhetorical  chmax  to  interpret  the 
phrase  as  meaning  that  the  whole  cathohc 
church  would  have  new  life  put  into  it  by 
Israel's  recovery,  and  though  we  should  expect 
this  idea  to  prove  true,  yet  I  do  not  think  it  is 
natural  to  introduce  it  here. 

3.  St.  Paul's  language  —  'beloved  for  the 
fathers'  sake,'  '  if  the  root  be  holy,  so  are  the 
branches ' — comes  very  close  to  the  current 
Jewish  language  about  '  the  merits  of  the 
fathers,'  and  yet  is  deeply  distinguished  from  it. 
The  Jews  as  represented  in  the  Talmud — and 
the  belief  goes  back  to  St.  Paul's  time^— 
believed  that  no  prayer  was  so  effective  as  that 
which  was  offered  in  the  name  of '  the  fathers.' 
Thus :  '  How  many  prayers  did  Elijah  speak  on 
Mount  Carmel  that  fire  might  fall  from  heaven, 
and  he  was  not  heard  ;  but  when  he  mentioned 

'  Ezek.  xxxvii.  ^  See  my  Ephesians,  pp.  258  ff. 


A  purpose  of  love  for  all  mankind  79 

the  name  of  the  dead,  and  called  Jehovah  the 
God  of  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob,  then  at  once 
he  was  heard.  So  was  it  in  the  case  of  Moses. 
When  the  Israelites  had  accomplished  that  bad 
work,  Moses  stood  up  and  spoke  for  their  justi- 
fication forty  days  and  forty  nights,  and  was  not 
heard.  But  when  he  mentioned  the  dead,  he 
was  at  once  heard.  .  .  .  Therefore  as  the  living 
vine  supports  itself  on  a  dead  stock  (i.  e.  grows 
out  of  a  stock  dry  and  seemingly  dead),  so 
Israel  lives  and  supports  itself  on  the  fathers 
since  they  are  dead^'  The  individual  Israelite, 
moreover,  could  supply  his  own  deficiencies  in 
righteousness  out  of  the  treasury  of  merits 
which  belonged  to  him  in  virtue  of  his  descent 
from  the  common  fathers  of  the  race,  or  the 
holy  progenitors  of  his  own  family.  In  other 
words  the  Israelites  in  various  ways  and  senses 
depended  for  salvation  on  having  'Abraham  to 
their  father.'  And  it  has  already  appeared 
sufficiently  how  dangerous  this  belief  was;  and 
how  utterly  St.  Paul,  Hke  EzekieP  and  John 

'  Quoted,  with  much  other  illustrative  matter,  by  Weber,  I.e. 
pp.  293  ff.  The  fancy  is  based  on  i  Kings  xix.  36  ;  Exod,  xxxii. 
13.  Cf.  on  Cant.  i.  5,  *  I  am  black  but  comely  ' — '  The  congrega- 
tion of  Israel  speaks  :  I  am  black  through  mine  own  works,  but 
lovely  through  the  works  of  my  fathers.' 

2  Ezek.  xiv.  14. 


8o         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

the  Baptist  before  him,  repudiated  this  idea  of 
genealogical  and  traditional  merit  as  a  ground 
of  confidence  before  God. 

On  the  other  hand,  this  belief  in  the  transfer- 
ence of  merit  was  based  on  a  true  idea  of  the 
organic  unity  of  the  race.  The  Jewish  race  was 
bound  up  into  one  with  its  great  progenitors  ; 
and  it  is  these  men  who  are  its  true  representa- 
tives. They  show  what  their  race  can  be  and  is 
meant  to  be,  and  along  what  lines  it  is  meant  to 
move.  Their  election  and  walk  with  God  laid 
a  consecration  on  all  who  came  after  them ;  as 
St.  Paul  elsewhere  says  that  the  children  of  a 
Christian  parent  in  a  mixed  marriage  are  holy, 
i.  e.  have  a  consecration  laid  upon  them  by  their 
partly  Christian  parentage  \  The  patriarchs 
exhibit  Israel  as  God  means  it  to  be.  And  God, 
so  to  speak,  cannot  forget  that  every  Israelite  is 
a  child  of  Abraham  and  Isaac  and  Jacob,  and 
that  in  their  faith  and  religion  lies  his  possi- 
bility and  his  glory. 

Thus  stated,  the  idea  of  the  'communion  of 
saints'  in  the  Jewish  race  is  nothing  else  than 
a  ground  of  hope,  and  a  stimulus  to  recovery. 
And  the  idea  admits  at  once  of  being  trans- 
ferred to  the  catholic  Israel,  as  in  fact  its  Jewish 

'  I  Cor.  vii.  14. 


A  purpose  of  love  for  all  mankind  8i 

parody  has,  at  certain  periods,  been  only  too  fully 
and  fatally  transferred.  I  say,  the  true  idea 
admits  of  being  transferred.  We  belong  to 
the  same  body  as  the  apostles  and  martyrs, 
the  virgins  and  saints,  the  Jewish  patriarchs  and 
prophets  also.  Their  possibihties  are  ours.  Their 
God  is  our  God  for  ever  and  ever.  And  God 
looks  on  us  as  in  one  body  with  them.  We 
too  are  beloved  for  these  our  fathers'  sakes. 
And  they  too,  we  cannot  doubt,  are  conscious 
of  our  fellowship  with  them,  and  if  we  are  trying 
to  live  in  the  same  spirit  with  them,  we  must 
believe,  all  the  Hmitations  of  our  knowledge 
notwithstanding,  that  they  are  supporting  and 
helping  us,  as  in  Christ  our  sympathetic  advo- 
cates and  allies. 

4.  The  metaphor  of  the  olive  and  the  grafting 
is  intelligible  enough  without  explanation.  We 
know  how  often  the  olive  and  the  vine  are  taken 
in  the  Old  Testament  and  in  other  Jewish 
writings— as  in  the  passage  just  quoted  from 
the  Talmud— for  a  symbol  of  Israel;  we  must 
frankly  recognize  that  St.  Paul,  apparently  in 
forgetfulness  and  not  by  design,  accommodates 
the  physical  process  of  grafting  to  its  spiritual 
counterpart ;  for  in  physical  fact,  of  course,  the 
ingrafted  shoot  (which  represents  the  Gentiles), 

II.  G 


82         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


and  not  the  stock  upon  which  it  is  grafted  (which 
represents  the  Jews),  would  determine  the  cha- 
racter and  produce  of  the  tree :  but  when  this  is 
once  recognized  it  may  be  forgotten,  and  the 
metaphor  is  as  intelHgible  to  us  as  if  the  physical 
process  of  grafting  were  really  as  St.  Paul 
represents  it. 

5.  As  we  read  the  words,  'And  so  all  Israel 
shall  be  saved,' we  cannot  help  asking  ourselves — 
Does  St.  Paul  mean  us  to  beheve  this  of  all 
Israelites  w^ithout  exception,  or  even  of  Israel 
in  general  with  an  absolute  necessity  ?  I  think 
the  answer  should  be  a  negative  in  both  cases  ^ 
Just  above  St.  Paul  says,  looking  at  the  matter 
from  the  side  of  Israel,  'They  also,  if  they  continue 
not  in  unbetief,  shall  be  grafted  in.*  Here  he  is 
looking  at  the  matter  from  the  side  of  God.  It 
lies  in  the  divine  purpose  that  the  estabhshment 
of  the  cathoHc  church,  and  the  experience  of 
aHenation  on  the  part  of  the  Jews,  should  stimu- 
late them  to  regain  their  ancient  privileges  on  a 
new  basis  ;  '  and  so,'  looking  at  the  matter  from 
the  point  of  view  of  the  divine  intention,  'all 
Israel  shall  be  saved.'  Just  below,  from  the  same 
point  of  view,  it  is  stated  to  be  God's  purpose 

^  *  All  Israel,'  in  i  Kings  xii.  i,  2  Chron.  xii.  i,  Dan.  ix.  11, 
means  *  Israel  in  general.' 


A  purpose  of  love  for  all  mankind  83 

'to  have  mercy  upon  all  men.'  But,  in  inter- 
preting this  latter  passage,  we  are  doing  violence 
to  what  St.  Paul  says  elsewhere  with  emphatic 
distinctness,  if  we  imagine  that  he  asserts  that 
all  individual  men  without  exception  shall  ulti- 
mately attain  the  end  of  their  being  and  the 
fellowship  of  God.  In  these  passages,  as  else- 
where, St.  Paul  looks  at  things  from  two  points 
of  view,  without  attempting  to  present  us  with 
a  harmony  of  them.  From  one  point  of  view 
we  have  spread  out  before  us  the  'mystery,' 
or  revealed  secret  of  God,  and  discern  the 
purpose  of  His  love  working  on,  and  finding  its 
opportunities  even  in  the  gravest  moral  disasters. 
From  the  other  point  of  view  we  detect  human 
wilfulness,  able  in  a  measure,  but  never  com- 
pletely or  on  the  whole,  to  baffle  and  thwart  the 
divine  purpose.  St.  Paul,  I  say,  is  content  to 
recognize  both  points  of  view,  and  not  to  hold 
them  in  complete  combination.  He  uses  the 
perception  of  the  divine  purpose — in  this  case,  the 
recovery  of  the  Jews — as  a  motive  for  hope  and 
thankfulness  and  renewed  energy ;  but  he  does 
not,  apparently,  ask  himself  the  metaphysical 
questions  whether  God  foreknows  how  particular 
individuals  or  groups  of  men  will  act,  'or,  if  we 
must  say  that  God  does  so  foreknow  how  each 

G  2 


84         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

man  will  act,  how  this  is  reconcilable  with  his 
moral  freedom.  He  is  content  to  adore  the 
divine  purpose,  and  rest  upon  it ;  and  recognize, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  thwarting  power  of  human 
wilfulness. 

From  the  point  of  view  of  God's  patiently 
loving  purpose,  then,  a  great  and  fresh  oppor- 
tunity is  being  prepared  for  the  recovery  of  the 
whole  of  Israel,  when  '  the  times  of  the  Gentiles ' 
are  fulfilled  and  the  Church  stands  really  catholic 
before  their  eyes.  Just  in  the  same  way,  in  the 
larger  field  of  all  mankind,  the  purpose  of  God 
is  at  work  through  all  rejections,  and  all  judge- 
ments of  hardening,  to  convince  all  men  of  their 
need  of  God,  and  so  prepare  their  hearts  'that 
he  might  have  mercy  upon  all.'  But  from  the 
other  point  of  view  God  respects  human  freedom. 
Thus  over  against  the  divine  purpose  stands  the 
ambiguous  human  'if — 'if  they  continue  not  in 
their  unbelief.' 

This  ambiguous  human  element  is  a  prominent 
feature  in  Old  Testament  prophecy,  though  there 
too  the  thwarting  power  of  man's  perverseness 
is  limited.  If  not  in  one  way  then  in  another, 
if  not  through  one  set  of  agents  then  through 
others— on  the  whole  the  purpose  of  God  finds 
its  sure  way  to  accomplishment. 


Retrospect  over  the  argument       85 


And  now  that  we  have  given  all  the  pains  we 
can  to  entering  into  the  spirit  of  these  chapters, 
may  we  not  say  that  they  have  become  no  longer 
repellent  but  deeply  attractive?  Where  could 
we  find  a  more  liberating  outlook  over  the  wide 
purpose  of  God  in  redeeming  the  world  ?  Sin  is 
a  stern  fact,  and  demands  stern  dealing  to  over- 
come it  by  moral  discipline.  Men  of  all  sorts 
must  be  brought  to  realize  their  need  of  God, 
utterly  to  expel  the  false  dream  of  independence, 
and  humbly  to  w^elcome  the  unmerited  bounty 
of  the  divine  '  mercy,'  the  free  gift  of  pardon  and 
new  life.  This  then  is  the  way  in  which  the 
fundamental  purpose  of  God  for  man  shows 
itself  in  a  world  of  sin;  it  is  by  a  discipHne 
preparing  men  to  welcome  a  divine  mercy  of 
which  they  have  learnt  to  know  their  need. 
'  That  he  may  have  mercy  upon  all ' — this  is  the 
generous  end  upon  which  all  the  divine  dealings 
with  men  converge.  The  Jews  by  one  kind  of 
discipline  while  they  still  were  standing  together 
as  the  elect  people  of  God,  and  by  another  when, 
having  rejected  the  Christ  and  fallen  out  of  their 
religious  leadership,  they  were  to  be  stirred  to 


86         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

jealousy  by  the  spectacle  of  a  divine  fellowship 
from  which  they  were  excluded :  the  Gentiles 
by  a  different  sort  of  discipHne,  and  each  separate 
race  by  its  own;  nay  more,  every  individual, 
Jew  and  Greek,  Enghshman  or  Hindoo,  by  a 
distinctive  personal  chastening,  in  as  many  ways 
as  man  is  various  and  God  is  resourceful :  all 
men  are  so  to  be  dealt  with  as  that  all  men 
shall  be  brought  to  confess  themselves  to  be 
as  they  are  in  God's  sight,  and  surrender  them- 
selves to  Him  to  be  refashioned  after  the  divine 
image.  Through  all  national  and  personal  voca- 
tions realized,  by  which  human  character  is 
educated :  through  all  national  and  personal 
humiliations,  which  are  divine  judgements  by 
which  human  character  is  corrected  and  made 
docile  :  God's  untiring  patience  and  forbearance, 
in  sternness  and  in  love,  works  on  to  the  one 
universal  end— that  He  might  have  mercy  upon 
all.  The  uttermost  and  most  pitiable  collapse, 
even  the  imminence  of  death  itself,  may  be,  nay 
certainly  in  God's  intention  is,  His  remedy  for 
human  wilfulness :   a  means  by  which — 

*  God  unmakes  but  to  remake  the  soul 
He  else  made  first  in  vain,  which  must  not  be  ^' 

^  These  words  (which  in  their  full  sense  seem  to  go  beyond 
what  we  have  a  right  to  say)  occur  in  Browning's  Ring  and  the 


Retrospect  over  the  argument       87 

— must  not  be,  that  is,  so  far  as  the  resourceful- 
ness of  divine  love,  going  all  lengths  short  of 
destroying  the  fundamental  moral  choice  of  the 
soul,  can  avail  to  prevent  it.  This  teaching  of 
St.  Paul  suggests  a  wonderful  way  of  reading 
human  history,  and  inspires  us  with  the  right 
sort  of  patience  and  hopefulness  in  our  attitude 
towards  the  wider  problems  of  missionary  w^ork 
and  our  own  deahngs  with  individuals.  The 
races  to  whose  conversion  we  would  fain  minister 
seem  so  immovable  and  so  indifferent.  The 
men  and  women  whom  we  would  fain  help  seem 
so  hardened  or  so  weak.  But  'the  gifts  and 
calHngs  of  God'  within  them  and  about  them, 
'are  without  repentance.'  God's  remedies  for 
them  are  not  yet  exhausted.  We  therefore  have 
a  right  to  hope  and  labour  on, '  never  despairing  \' 
And  where  is  a  nobler  presentation  to  be 
found  than  here  of  the  idea  of  divine  election  ? 
That  in  the  great  household  of  the  world  there 
are  magnificent  and  (comparatively,  at  least)  igno- 
minious vocations  among  races  and  individuals ; 

Book.  It  is  the  Pope's  final  reflection,  when  he  condemns  Guido 
to  death,  that  his  execution  may  be  the  one  chance  for  his  spiritual 
recovery — 

*  In  the  main  criminal  I  see  no  chance 
Except  in  such  a  suddenness  of  fate.' 
'  Luke  vi.  35,  or  '  despairing  of  no  man,'  marg.  R.V. 


88         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

that  some  men  are  born  for  the  top,  and  other 
men  for  the  bottom  of  society;  that  there  are 
'honourable'  and  'dishonourable'  Hmbs  in  the 
body  of  humanit}^,  the  latter  fulfilling  their 
necessary  function  no  less  than  the  former,  is 
an  indisputable  fact.  It  is  no  use  challenging 
it,  any  more  than  any  other  fundamental  law  of 
the  universe.  And,  if  we  can  see  why  certain 
races  and  certain  individuals  are  fitted  for  certain 
tasks,  yet  on  the  whole  we  can  advance  but 
a  very  little  way  in  seeing  the  reason  of  human 
inequalities  as  in  fact  they  exist.  All  that  lies  in 
the  inscrutable  and  free  counsels  of  God,  and 
the  responsibihty  is — in  spite  of  the  modifying 
effects  of  human  sin — ultimately  His\  But  in 
St.  Paul's  treatment  of  it,  the  recognition  of  the 
fact  that  God  works  universal  ends  through 
selected  races  and  individuals,  is  robbed  of  all 
that  ministers  to  pride  and  narrowness  in  the 
elect,  or  to  hopelessness  and  a  sense  of  injustice 
in  the  rest. 

The  New  Testament  writers  in  general  would 
teach  us  that  with  God  is  no  respect  of  persons ; 

^  We  hold,  therefore,  with  regard  to  the  lots  of  men  in  this 
world,  exactly  the  opposite  of  what  Plato  suggested  under  the 
impulse  of  the  doctrine  of  transmigration,  '  It  is  the  man's  own 
choice,  God  is  blameless.' 


Retrospect  over  the  argument       89 

so  that  the  lowest  vocation  may  result  in  the 
highest  glory,  where  it  is  faithfully  fulfilled,  and 
the  highest  vocation,  misused,  in  the  deepest 
degradation  ;  but  St.  Paul  in  particular  makes  us 
feel  the  humbling  responsibility  which  attaches 
necessarily  to  any  state  of  election.  The  Jews 
failed  because  they  lacked  the  faith  and  docility 
which  would  have  enabled  them  to  correspond 
to  God's  larger  leading.  The  time  came  when 
God  who  had,  'through  the  Jews,  prepared  the 
Christ  for  the  world,'  had  also,  'through  the 
Gentiles,  prepared  the  world  for  Christ ' ;  but 
the  Jews  were  ready  neither  to  welcome  the 
Christ,  nor  to  'receive'  the  world.  Thus  the 
richest  ministry  ever  vouchsafed  to  a  race  was 
waiting  for  the  Jews,  and  they  proved  false  to  it, 
because  they  had  turned  their  privileges  into  an 
occasion  for  pride  and  selfishness,  and  would 
not  learn  the  new  truth  or  rise  to  the  new 
opportunity. 

Here  is  a  serious  warning  to  the  'elect'  of 
every  age.  How  often  has  the  church  at  large, 
or  a  national  church,  refused  the  call  to  expan- 
sion, and  lost  some  rich  part  of  its  heritage 
because  it  was  self-satisfied,  and  therefore  Mind? 
How  often  does  a  '  good  catholic '  fail  to  recog- 
nize that  he  is  utterly  misusing  the  gifts  of  grace, 


go         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

if  his  Catholicism  does  not  mean  a  generous  and 
self-sacrificing  desire  to  win  the  lost  and  save 
the  world?  How  often  has  the  profession  of 
being  'saved'  put  an  end  to  spiritual  growth 
and  the  struggle  with  sin  ?  How  many  religious 
orders  and  societies  have  Hved  on  the  reputation 
of  the  past,  and  appeared  to  fancy  that  the 
achievements  of  their  founders — 'the  merits  of 
the  fathers ' — would  justify  the  apathy  and  care- 
lessness of  those  who  had  inherited  an  honour- 
able name  ?  Indeed,  to  whatever  we  are  elect— 
whether  national,  or  ecclesiastical,  or  personal 
privileges— the  temptation  dogs  us  to  rest  on 
our  inherited  merits  and  have  no  open  ear  to 
the  guiding  voice  of  God,  as  it  calls  us  to  fresh 
ventures  and  renewed  sacrifices,  like  those  which 
laid  the  basis  of  the  position  of  which  we  now 
make  our  empty  or  insolent  boast.  But  thus  to 
evade  the  uncomfortable  requirements  of  the 
present  by  an  appeal  to  the  achievements  of 
the  past — whether  it  be  the  past  of  catholic 
tradition  or  '  the  Reformation  settlement ' — is  to 
expose  ourselves  inevitably  to  divine  condem- 
nation. 

Those  who  keep  the  open  ear  are  the  'remnant' 
in  every  age  and  church  and  nation.  They  are 
the  men  who  refuse  to  '  make  the  word  of  God 


Retrospect  over  the  argument       91 

of  none  effect/  because  of  the  blinding,  deadening 
force  of  social  tradition.  They  are  alive  and 
awake  to  *  buy  up  the  opportunity/  as  it  presents 
itself.  And  for  such  St.  Paul's  teaching,  inherited 
from  the  prophets,  of  the  function  of  the  remnant 
is  full  of  encouragement.  The  Bible  is  a  book 
contemptuous  of  majorities.  The  mass  of  men, 
conventional,  easily  satisfied,  self-centred,  accom- 
plish nothing,  redeem  and  regenerate  nothing. 
But  those  who  have  ears  to  hear  have  every 
motive,  though  they  be  few  in  number,  to  live 
at  the  highest  level  possible,  and  believe  to  the 
full  that  the  purpose  of  God  can  be  realized. 
God's  purpose  can  work,  and  has  in  history 
worked,  through  small  minorities,  through  single 
individuals.  They  are  the  true  representatives 
of  their  church,  their  nation,  their  class.  And 
when  the  inner  history  of  any  epoch  comes 
to  be  known,  while  the  inert  mass  of  people, 
'  important '  or  '  unimportant,'  is  lost  in  the  dim 
background,  they  will  be  seen  distinctive  in  the 
foreground:  the  real  movement  of  God  in  history, 
the  real  witness  of  the  truth,  the  real  spiritual 
succession  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  will  be  seen 
to  have  been  carried  on  through  them  for  the 
enriching  of  the  whole  world. 

I  would  add  two  reflections  on  subordinate. 


92  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

but  still  important  points.  It  is  the  function  of 
the  catholic  church  to  let  its  light  so  shine 
before  men  that  it  shall  '  provoke  to  jealousy/ 
by  the  manifest  presence  of  God  in  the  midst 
of  it,  the  ancient  and  now  alienated  people,  the 
Jews.  At  the  moment,  with  the  anti-semite  cry 
strong  throughout  Europe,  and  on  the  morrow 
of  the  'affaire  Dreyfus,'  these  words  ring  with 
a  bitter  irony.  And  in  our  own  East  London 
how  utterly  unlikely  it  is  that  the  spectacle  of 
our  Christianity  should  make  the  Jews  feel  that 
Christian  society  cannot  but  be  divine !  Indeed, 
the  unfulfilled  debt  Christendom  owes  to  the 
Jews  is  appalling.  That  ancient  and  indomitable 
race  retains,  with  all  its  faults,  its  close-knitting 
sense  of  brotherhood,  its  faith,  its  frugality,  its 
industry,  its  patience,  its  heroism.  We  are  meant 
to  show  it  the  greater  glories  of  the  New 
Covenant,  the  splendour  of  the  purity,  the  un- 
worldliness,  the  expansiveness,  the  love  of  the 
brotherhood  of  Christ.  And  we  do  show  it — 
what?  Is  there  that  in  our  common  Christi- 
anity, as  they  see  it,  which  should  obviously 
make  Judaism  ashamed  of  itself?  Could  St. 
Paul,  looking  at  our  Christendom,  have  expected 
'  all  Israel  to  be  saved '  by  the  spectacle  of 
a  catholic  church?    These  are  considerations 


Retrospect  over  the  argument       93 

which  indeed  should  drive  us  to  bitter  penitence 
and  earnest  prayer. 

Finally,  before  we  leave  these  chapters,  we 
shall  do  well  to  look  steadily  at  St.  Paul's  habit 
of  mind  in  deahng  with  antithetic  or  comple- 
mentary truths.  No  one  could  believe  with 
a  more  glorious  conviction  than  St.  Paul  in  the 
dominance  of  the  purpose  of  God  in  the  world : 
in  the  certainty  of  the  accomplishment  of  what 
God  has  predestined.  If  the  very  rejection  of 
the  Christ  by  the  Jews  was  turned  into  an 
opportunity  for  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles, 
what  crime  can  be  too  great  for  the  divine 
wisdom  to  overrule  it  for  good  ?  No  one,  on 
the  other  hand,  could  realize  more  deeply  the 
responsibihty  which  Hes  upon  men  :  their  strange 
power  to  correspond  with  God,  or  partly  thwart 
His  purpose  for  them  and  through  them.  My 
point  is  only  this :  he  is  true  to  both  sides  of  an 
antithesis,  even  though  the  exact  relationship 
and  interworking  of  the  twin  truths  is  necessarily 
and  finally  obscure.  He  refuses  to  be  one-sided 
at  the  requirement  of  an  incomplete  human 
logic.  It  has  been  often  pointed  out,  and  in 
many  directions,  how  prone  we  all  are  to  take 
up  with  one  side  of  truth— with  predestination 
or  free-will,  with  the  divinity  or  the  manhood 


94         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

of  Christ,  with  the  unity  or  the  trinity  of  the 
Godhead,  with  sacraments  or  conversion,  with 
authority  or  personal  judgement ;  and  if  we  are 
intellectually  disposed,  we  call  our  one-sided- 
ness  'being  logical.'  But  we  had  better  let 
St.  Paul  teach  us  once  for  all  that  impartiality 
is  a  greater  thing  than  this  cheap  logic ;  even  as 
Church  history  teaches  us  that  a  sharp-witted 
but  one-sided  zeal  for  truth  is  one  main  cause  of 
bitterness,  narrowness,  and  schism. 


Practical  exhortation  95 


DIVISION  V.    Chapters  XII-XV.  13. 

Practical  Exhortation. 

We  must  almost  all  of  us,  in  climbing  some 
high  hill,  have  experienced  the  necessity  for 
two  distinct  efforts,  the  second  more  or  less  un- 
anticipated. We  started  to  climb  to  the  apparent 
summit,  only  to  find,  when  we  got  there,  that  it 
was  no  real  summit  at  all,  but  a  prominent 
spur,  and  that  a  second  climb  was  required  of 
us  before  we  were  really  at  the  top.  An  intel- 
lectual experience  not  unlike  this  is  the  lot  of 
the  student  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  The 
apparent  climax  of  the  epistle  is  the  end  of 
chapter  viii,  and  the  student  at  starting  expects 
his  brain  to  be  chiefly  taxed  in  following  the 
closely  knit  argument  which  is  to  lead  him 
thither.  But  he  reaches  it  only  to  find  another 
like  effort  of  mind  required  of  him  in  grasp- 
ing the  meaning  of  the  section  (chapters  ix-xi) 
in  which  St.  Paul  is  occupied  in  justifying  God's 
deahngs  with  the  chosen  people.  But  now, 
intellectually  speaking,  his  work  is  almost  over. 


96         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

As  the  climber,  seated  on  the  summit  of  the 
hill  when  at  last  it  is  gained,  lets  his  eye  range 
over  a  rich  and  wide  prospect,  and  takes  in  its 
vastness  and  variety,  or  traces  below  him  the 
delightful  descent:  so  it  is  with  the  reader  of 
this  epistle  who  has  entered  sincerely  into  the 
spirit  of  St.  Paul.  His  intellectual  scruples  as 
to  the  divine  deahngs  have  been  just  laid  to 
rest ;  before  that  his  mind  had  been  convinced, 
and  his  heart  and  will  attracted  and  won,  by  the 
unfolding  of  the  divine  righteousness,  that  is  to 
say  of  the  free  grace  and  love  of  God.  And 
now,  proportionate  to  the  greatness  of  the  effort 
by  which  this  satisfaction  of  intellect  and  heart 
and  will  has  been  won,  is  the  joy  of  expansion 
which  remains— the  joy  of  the  surrendered  mind 
in  appreciating  all  that  is  practically  possible  for 
it  in  the  light  of  the  love  of  God.  '  I  will  run 
the  way  of  thy  commandments,  because  thou 
dost  enlarge  my  heart,'  that  is,  expand  it  with 
a  sense  of  liberty  and  joy\  'All  things  are 
ours,'  if  but  once  in  completeness  of  self-surren- 
dering faith  'we  are  Christ's'  as  assuredly 
'Christ  is  God'sl'  'I  can  do  all  things  in 
Christ  that  strengtheneth  me"\' 

'  Ps.  cxix.  33.     See  Driver's  Parallel  Psalter,  Oxford  (1898). 
-  I  Cor.  iii.  31-3.  ^  Phil.  iv.  13. 


Self-surrender  97 


DIVISION  V.  §  I.    Chapter  XII.  1-2. 

Self -surrender  in  response  to  God. 

And  first  of  all  the  general  attitude  of  mind 
is  defined,  which  it  befits  us  to  adopt  towards 
God  as  He  has  now  revealed  Himself  to  us.  It 
is  the  response  of  entire  self-surrender— the 
response  of  sacrifice  to  sacrifice.  St.  Paul  '  be- 
seeches/ or  rather  *  encourages/  or  *  summons  ' 
the  Roman  Christians,  using  for  his  motive 
power^  all  the  rich  store  of  divine  compassions 
which  he  has  just  been  occupied  in  disclosing 
or  explaining  to  them,  to  make  the  only  response 
really  possible  to  such  an  exhibition  of  divine 
love ;  and  that  is  to  present  themselves  in  sacri- 
fice to  God.  What  God  asks  is  not  dead 
victims  but  living  men,  in  body  as  well  as  spirit 
consecrated  to  His  service  and  rendered  accept- 
able in  His  sight:  and  this  sort  of  self-oblation, 

'  For  the  use  of  '  by,'  cf.  xv.  30  ;  i  Cor.  i.  10  ('  through '  is  the 
same  word)  ;  2  Cor.  x.  i. 

11.  H 


98         The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

on  the  pattern  of  Christ,  is  the  only  reasonable 
sort  of  divine  service  for  man  to  offer.  The 
transitory  world,  to  which  such  an  ideal  is  quite 
aHen,  is  indeed  all  around  them,  but  they  are 
not  to  suffer  themselves  to  be  assimilated  to  its 
fleeting  fashion.  Their  whole  point  of  view  is 
changed  and  become  new;  and  this  must  result 
in  so  thorough  a  transformation  of  their  old 
worldly  ways  of  thinking  that  a  new  inward 
light  will  shine  in  their  hearts,  and  they  will  be 
able  to  discriminate  and  see  what  God's  will  is, 
and  so  to  follow  the  way  of  perfection. 

I  beseech  you  therefore,  brethren,  by  the  mercies  of 
God,  to  present  your  bodies  a  hving  sacrifice,  holy,  accept- 
able to  God,  which  is  your  reasonable  service.  And  be 
not  fashioned  according  to  this  world :  but  be  ye  trans- 
formed by  the  renewing  of  your  mind,  that  ye  may  prove 
what  is  the  good  and  acceptable  and  perfect  will  of  God. 

This  short  paragraph  is  full  of  meaning,  and 
is  profoundly  characteristic  of  St.  Paul  in  thought 
and  language. 

The  '  therefore '  is  one  of  the  great  transitional 
'  therefores  ^ '  by  which  St.  Paul  shows  his  con- 
stant sense  of  the  inter-connexion  of  doctrine 
and  life :  the  doctrine  passing  by  a  clear  logic 
into  the  practical  life,  and  the  life  drawing  all  its 

*  See  further,  Ephes.  pp.  172  ff. 


Self-surrender  99 

practical  motives  from  the  realities  disclosed  in 
the  doctrine.  It  is  truly  nothing  whatever  but 
shallowness  and  'shortness  of  thought'  which 
can  suffer  us  to  imagine  that  the  Christian  char- 
acter— I  do  not  say  all  morality,  but  the  Christian 
character— could  long  survive  the  Christian 
creed. 

And  the  character  of  this  summary  exhortation 
shows  us  that  any  idea  of  a  faith  which  stops 
short  of  moral  identification  with  its  object  is 
utterly  alien  to  St.  Paul's  mind.  Faith  is  no  true 
Christian  faith,  if  it  is  content  to  receive  from 
the  Father,  or  from  Christ,  a  gift  which  leaves  it 
still  outside  the  life  of  God.  The  faith  which 
Christ  inspires  asks  for  and  receives  nothing 
less  than  real  fellowship  in  His  divine  and  human 
life,  and  that  life  is,  in  its  joys  as  well  as  its 
sorrows,  a  life  of  self-surrender,  of  sacrifice. 
Thus  the  Christian  onl}^  welcomes  the  gift  of 
pardon  through  Christ's  sacrifice  in  order  to  be 
admitted  into  the  freedom  of  the  dedicated  life  in 
Christ,  which  is  the  life  of  sacrifice.  It  is  the 
sort  of  sacrifice  (as  St.  Paul's  language  indicates) 
which  is  as  different  as  possible  from  any  such 
asceticism  as  is  prompted  by  contempt  of  the 
flesh  or  the  body,  or  refusal  of  joy,  or  love  of 
death.  It  is  sacrifice  which  seeks  to  cultivate 
H  2 


loo        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

into  full  vitality  every  faculty  of  body  as  well  as 
of  mind  (and  that  in  an  active  society  or  brother- 
hood), in  order  to  consecrate  all  we  are  or  can  be 
to  the  service  of  God,  and  so  realize  in  conscious 
correspondence  with  the  divine  will  the  rational 
worship  for  humanity. 

St.  Paul's  words  here  about  a  'living'  as 
opposed  to  a  bloody,  and  a  'rational'  as  opposed 
to  an  animal  sacrifice,  may  be  the  basis  on  which 
the  eucharist,  the  Christian  worship  *  in  spirit 
and  in  truth,'  was  often  called  in  early  times  the 
'reasonable'  and  'bloodless  sacrificed'  And 
whether  this  be  the  case  or  no,  at  any  rate  we 
must  relearn  the  lesson  that  St.  Augustine  is 
for  ever  insisting  upon,  that  the  eucharistic 
sacrifice  essentially  involves  and  implies  the 
offering  of  the  Church  as  the  body  of  Christ, 

*  It  is  more  likely,  however,  that  the  phrases  '  rational  worship' 
and  *  bloodless  sacrifice '  had  an  earlier  Jewish  origin.  They 
occur  in  The  Testament  of  the  XII  Patnarchs,  which  is  apparently 
a  Jewish  document  christianized.  There  the  angels  are  said 
{Levi.  3)  to  '  offer  to  the  Lord  a  rational  odour  of  sweet  savour  and  a 
bloodless  offering.'  Philo  also,  as  Mr.  Conybeare  points  out  to  me, 
in  several  passages  describes  the  true  sacrifices  as  '  bloodless  ' :  and 
by  bloodless  sacrifices  he  means  either  the  meal  offerings  as  opposed 
to  the  animal  sacrifices  {De  Anini.  SacH/.  ed.  Mangey  ii.  250), 
or\ruly  spiritual  acts  as  opposed  to  merely  outward  {De  Ebreitate^ 
i.  p.  370,  cf.  ii.  254).  These  two  ideas  run  easily  into  one  another, 
and  the  earliest  uses  of  the  expression  'bloodless  sacrifice'  for  the 
eucharist  have  a  similar  ambiguity. 


Self-surrender  loi 

that  is,  the  offering  of  ourselves  as  members  of 
the  body ;  and  we  may  feel  profoundly  thankful 
that,  in  our  service  of  Holy  Communion,  this 
truth  has  been  restored  to  its  proper  prominence, 
after  having  been,  in  the  pre-Reformation  service, 
almost  ignored.  'And  here  we  offer  and  present 
unto  thee,  O  Lord,  ourselves,  our  souls  and 
bodies,  to  be  a  reasonable,  holy,  and  lively 
sacrifice  unto  thee.'  In  this  prayer  is  really  the 
climax  of  our  sacrificial  worship  \ 

The  true  service  of  God  is  intelligent  corre- 
spondence with  the  divine  will— this  is  perfection ; 
and  to  correspond  with  the  divine  will  we  must 
be  able  to  know  it :  and  this  is  what  we  can  do 
if  we  are  true  to  the  principle  of  our  new  birth, 
and  suffer  it  radically  and  pcruianently  to  trans- 
form us  and  our  point  of  view  (for  nothing  less 
than  this  is  carried  by  St.  Paul's  expression 
rendered  'transform').  Negativel^^,  this  means 
that  we  must  maintain  our  separateness  from 
the  worldly  world,  to  which  we  died  at  our 
baptism — the  world  of  human  society  as  it 
devotes  itself  to  its  business  and  its  pleasures. 


^  See  further,  p.  179.  I  may  be  allowed  to  express  the  earnest 
desire  that  we  might  have  liberty  in  our  Church  to  read  both  of  the 
Post  Communion  Prayers,  which  seem  supplementary  rather  than 
alternative  to  one  another. 


102        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

leaving  God  out  of  account  \  For  if  the  worldly 
world  is  suffered  to  fashion  us  in  accordance 
zvith  i/s  shalloiv  and  transitory  show  (this  is  the 
idea  conveyed  by  the  word  rendered  '  fashion  '), 
we  shall  be  blinded  to  what  our  regeneration 
ought  to  have  made  plain  to  us. 

^  See  Efylies.  p.  92. 


The  community  spirit  103 


DIVISION  V.  §  2.    Chapter  XII.  3-21. 

The  community  spirit. 

And  when  St.  Paul,  justifying  himself  here,  as 
before  and  later  on,  by  the  special  divine  favour 
which  has  made  him  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles  \ 
proceeds  to  develop  his  exhortation,  it  appears 
that  with  him,  as  with  St.  James  ^,  the  form  in 
which  *  divine  service  '  shows  itself  must  be  love 
of  the  brethren.  To  be  called  into  the  body  of 
Christ — the  society  which  is  bound  into  one  by 
His  life  and  spirit— is  to  be  called  to  social 
service,  that  is,  to  live  a  community  life,  and 
to  cultivate  the  virtues  which  make  true  com- 
munity life  possible  and  healthy.  Of  these 
the  first  is  humility,  which  in  this  connexion 
means  the  viewing  oneself  in  all  things  as  one 
truly  is,  as  a  part  of  a  whole.  Of  the  faith  by 
which  the  whole  body  lives,  a  share,  but  only 

1  See  i.  5,  11-15  ;  xv.  15-17.  ^  Jas.  i.  17. 


104        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

a  share,  belongs  to  each  member— a  certain 
measure  of  faith — and  he  must  not  strain  beyond 
it.  But  he  is  dihgently  to  make  the  best  of  his 
faculty,  and  do  the  work  for  which  his  special 
gift  qualifies  him,  in  due  subordination  to  the 
welfare  of  the  whole,  whether  it  be  inspired 
preaching,  or  ordinary  teaching,  or  the  distribu- 
tion of  alms,  or  presidency,  or  some  other  form 
of  helping  others  which  is  his  special  function. 
Besides  humility  there  are  other  virtues  which 
make  the  life  of  a  community  healthy  and  happy, 
and  St.  Paul  enumerates  them,  as  they  occur  to 
his  mind,  in  no  defined  order  or  completeness. 
There  must  be  sincerity  in  love,  that  is  in 
considering  and  seeking  the  real  interest  of 
others;  there  must  be  the  righteous  severity 
which  keeps  the  moral  atmosphere  free  from 
taint ;  there  must  be  tenderness  of  feeling,  which 
makes  the  community  a  real  family  of  brothers ; 
and  an  absence  of  all  self-assertion,  or  desire  for 
personal  prominence ;  and  thorough  industry ; 
and  spiritual  zeal ;  and  devotion  to  God's  ser- 
vice ;  and  the  cheerfulness  which  Christian  hope 
inspires ;  and  the  ready  endurance  of  affliction  ; 
and  close  application  to  prayer ;  and  a  love  for 
giving  whenever  fellow  Christians  need;  and 
an  eagerness  to  entertain  them  when  they  are 


The  community  spirit  105 

travelling — for  'the  community*  embraces,  not 
one  church  only,  but  'all  the  churches/ 

Nay  in  a  wider  sense  the  community  extends 
itself  to  all  mankind,  even  those  who  persecute  ^ 
them.  According  to  his  Lord's  precepts,  the 
Christian  is  only  to  bless  his  persecutors. 
Generally  he  is  to  be,  in  the  deep,  original 
sense,  sympathetic  with  his  fellow  men  every- 
where in  their  joys  and  sorrows,  and  (to  return 
to  the  Christian  community)  he  is  to  seek  to  let 
it  be  pervaded  by  an  impartial  kindness ;  and, 
not  thinking  himself  a  superior  person  suited 
only  for  superior  affairs,  he  is  to  let  the  current 
of  ordinary  human  needs  bear  him  along.  He 
is  not  to  set  undue  store  on  his  own  opinions  - ; 
he  is  utterly  to  banish  the  spirit  of  retaliation ; 
he  is  deliberately  to  plan  so  to  live  as  that  his 
life  shall  prove,  not  a  stumbHngblock,  but  a 
moral  attraction  to  men  in  general  ^ ;  he  is  never 
to  quarrel  with  any  one  if  he  can  possibly  help 
it ;  he  is  completely  to  suppress  his  resentment 

*  The  word  is  the  same  as  St.  Paul  has  just  used  to  describe  the 
eager  'pursuit'  of  opportunities  of  hospitality  by  the  Christian. 
He  '  pursues  '  opportunities  of  doing  good,  while  he  is  himself 
'  pursued  '  by  enen.ies  to  do  him  evil. 

^  Cf.  xi.  25,  and  Prov.  iii.  7. 

'  Prov.  iii.  4  LXX.  *  Provide  things  honourable  in  the  sight  of 
the  Lord  and  of  man.' 


io6        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

when  he  is  wronged,  and  simply  to  leave  the 
matter  to  the  wrath  of  God,  as  indeed  the  law 
would  have  him  do  ^ ;  so  that,  by  his  very  meek- 
ness and  returning  good  for  evil,  he  may, 
according  to  the  wise  man's  saying,  heap  burning 
shame  upon  his  enemy,  like  coals  of  fire  ^.  Evil 
is  all  around  the  Christian,  and  it  is  a  strong  man 
armed ;  but  the  Christian  has  with  him  the 
forces  of  good  which  are  yet  stronger,  and  by 
no  passive  withdrawal,  but  by  the  active  exercise 
of  good,  he  is  to  win  the  victory  over  evil. 

For  I  say,  through  the  grace  that  was  given  me,  to 
every  man  that  is  among  you,  not  to  think  of  himself 
more  highly  than  he  ought  to  think  ;  but  so  to  think  as  to 
think  soberly,  according  as  God  hath  dealt  to  each  man 
a  measure  of  faith.  For  even  as  we  have  many  members 
in  one  bod}^  and  all  the  members  have  not  the  same  office : 
so  we,  who  are  many,  are  one  body  in  Christ,  and  severally 
members  one  of  another.  And  having  gifts  diflfering 
according  to  the  grace  that  was  given  to  us,  whether 
prophecy,  let  iis  prophesy  according  to  the  proportion  of 
our  faith ;  or  ministr}',  let  us  give  ourselves  to  our  ministry ; 
or  he  that  teacheth,  to  his  teaching;  or  he  that  exhorteth, 
to  his  exhorting:  he  that  giveth,  let  him  do  it  with  liberality ; 
he  that  ruleth,  w^ith  diligence ;  he  that  sheweth  mercy, 
with  cheerfulness.  Let  love  be  without  hypocrisy.  Abhor 
that  which  is  evil ;  cleave  to  that  which  is  good.  In  love 
of  the  brethren  be  tenderly  affectioned  one  to  another;  in 
honour  preferring  one  another  ;  in  diligence  not  slothful ; 

'  Deut.  xxxii.  35.  -  Prov.  xxv.  21, 


The  community  spirit  107 

fervent  in  spirit ;  serving  the  Lord ;  rejoicing  in  hope ; 
patient  in  tribulation;  continuing  stedfastly  in  prayer; 
communicating  to  the  necessities  of  the  saints;  given  to 
hospitahty.  Bless  them  that  persecute  3'ou  ;  bless,  and 
curse  not.  Rejoice  with  them  that  rejoice ;  weep  with 
them  that  weep.  Be  of  the  same  mind  one  toward 
another.  Set  not  your  mind  on  high  things,  but  con- 
descend to  things  that  are  lowly.  Be  not  wise  in  your 
own  conceits.  Render  to  no  man  evil  for  evil.  Take 
thought  for  things  honourable  in  the  sight  of  all  men. 
If  it  be  possible,  as  much  as  in  you  lieth,  be  at  peace  with 
all  men.  Avenge  not  yourselves,  beloved,  but  give  place 
unto  wrath  :  for  it  is  written.  Vengeance  belongeth  unto 
me ;  I  will  recompense,  saith  the  Lord.  But  if  thine 
enemy  hunger,  feed  him  ;  if  he  thirst,  give  him  to  drink  : 
for  in  so  doing  thou  shalt  heap  coals  of  fire  upon  his  head. 
Be  not  overcome  of  evil  but  overcome  evil  with  good. 

(i)  It  is  the  idea  of  corporate  life  which  domi- 
nates all  this  exhortation.  No  writing  in  the 
New  Testament  has  done  more  than  the  Epistle 
to  the  Romans  to  strengthen  the  sense  of 
spiritual  individuality,  and  to  rouse  the  individual 
spirit  to  protest,  as  it  protested  in  Luther,  against 
spiritual  tyranny.  But  it  is  a  complete  mistake 
to  suppose  that  the  epistle  is  individualistic  in 
tendency.  The  Hfe  into  which  the  individuars 
faith  in  Jesus  admits  him  is  the  life  of  a  com- 
munity, and  its  virtues  are  the  virtues  of 
community  life.  The  strengthened  individuality 
is  to  go  to  enrich  an  organized  society. 


io8        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

This  is  expressed  in  the  famihar  metaphor  of 
the  body  which  had  been  employed  in  non- 
Christian  thought  before  St.  Paul  identified  it 
with  himself  and  Christianity  by  the  vigorous 
and  profound  use  which  he  made  of  it^  The 
Christian  community  is  a  body  bound  together 
in  a  common  life  by  a  common  inspiring  presence 
and  spirit.  The  divine  grace  and  good  favour 
of  Christ  shows  itself  in  special  'gifts'  (in  the 
Greek  this  word  'charisma'  expresses  a  particular 
embodiment  of  the  general  grace,  '  charis,'  of 
God) ;  and  no  individual  member  is  without  his 
special  endowment.  It  is  not  a  few  officers  of 
the  community  who  are  gifted,  but  all ;  and  all 
are  to  co-operate  in  the  common  life  and  work. 
Of  gifts  there  are  various  sorts  which  we  hear  of 
in  the  New  Testament.  There  are  the  official 
gifts,  the  result  of  what  we  call  ordination  as  the 
gift  which  was  '  in '  Timothy  *  by  the  laying  on 
of  hands.'  And  those  among  the  Christians  at 
Rome,  who  '  presided  '  and  '  ministered,'  would 
have  been,  we  should  suppose,  official  presbyters 
or  'bishops,'  and  deacons.  But  the  Roman 
Christians  hardly  constituted  yet  an  organized 
church, and  we  cannot  tell  whence  such  officers  of 

'  The  truth,  however,  which  underlies  the  metaphor  of  the  body 
is,  we  may  say,  equally  present  in  all  the  New  Testament  writers. 


The  community  spirit  109 

the  community  received  theirappointment.  There 
is  no  ground  for  a  positive  assertion  of  any  kmd  ^ 
Again  we  hear  of  special  gifts,  such  as  powers  of 
heahng,  speaking  with  tongues  and  prophesy- 
ing, which  sometimes  accompanied  the  bestowal 
of  the  Spirit,  through  the  laying  on  of  hands 
which  was  given  to  all.  And  the  gift  of 
prophesying  among  the  Roman  Christians  ma}' 
have  been  a  gift  of  this  kind.  But  St.  Paul  is 
perhaps  writing  with  the  circumstances  of  the 
Corinthian  church,  rather  than  those  of  the 
Roman  Christians,  in  his  mind  ;  and  we  can 
gather  but  little  about  the  exact  condition  of 
things  at  the  capital.  Once  more,  St.  Paul  uses 
the  word  '  gifts '  for  more  personal  and  moral 
endowments,  as  for  the  bent  of  mind  which  leads 
men,  under  divine  guidance,  towards  celibac}'  or 
marriage  -.  But  in  this  place  he  is  not  distin- 
guishing. He  is  hardly  speaking  in  view  of  any 
special  circumstances  at  Rome.  He  is  but 
emphasizing  the  fact  which  is  the  basis  of  all  the 
life  of  Christians  everywhere — the  fact  that  each 
individual  member  of  the  body  has  a  special  gift, 
and  a  special  function  for  the  good  of  the  whole 
body,  by  which  the  gift  is  to  express  itself. 
What  every  individual  Christian  has  to  do, 

*  See,  however,  p.  196.  ^  i  Cor.  vii.  7. 


no        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

then,  is  to  realize  his  own  gift  and  correspond 
to  it.  The  gift  involves  a  certain  'measure  of 
faith.'  The  faith  of  each  individual  Christian  is 
the  same  in  its  basis.  It  holds  him  in  spiritual 
allegiance  to  the  same  Lord,  and  in  confession 
of  the  same  elemental  creed.  But,  besides  this, 
it  involves  a  special  insight,  which  is  the  peculiar 
endowment  of  the  individual.  There  is  some- 
thing which  each  man  can  realize  and  impart,  as 
no  one  else  is  qualified  to  do.  The  Church  is 
the  poorer  if  he  holds  back  or  fails  to  stir  up 
this  gift  of  his  own,  and  on  the  other  hand  he 
incurs  the  peril  of  presumption  if  he  ventures 
beyond  it.  Even  the  inspired  man,  the  prophet, 
must  prophesy  within  the  limits  of  what  his  own 
special  proportion  of  faith  enables  him  to  perceive 
and  grasp  \  even  though  another  prophet  with 
a  larger  faith  might  rightly  say  what  he  may 
not  venture   upon.      '  Let    each   man   be   fully 

'  Dr.  Liddon,  with  many  others,  interprets  *  according  to  the 
proportion  of  M^  faith/  i.  e.  according  to  *  the  majestic  proportion 
of  the  (objective)  faith.'  This  is  the  characteristically  Latin,  as 
against  the  Greek,  interpretation,  and  the  Greek  is  certainly  to  be 
preferred,  because  'according  to  the  proportion  of  our  faith' 
follows  naturally  upon  'according  as  .  . .  the  measure  of  faith  '  just 
above  ;  indeed  '  faith  '  in  this  context  can  hardly  have  assigned 
to  it  without  violence  the  objective  meaning  which,  however,  in 
the  context  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles  it  no  doubt  frequently  bears, 
Cf  app.  note  A,  p.  205. 


The  community  spirit  m 

persuaded  in  his  own  mind.'  For  any  assertion 
which  goes  beyond  what  the  faith  of  the  indi- 
vidual enables  him  to  be  convinced  of,  is  for 
him  'sin/  We  greatly  need  this  exhortation 
to-day.  The  convictions  of  many  are  vague  and 
uncertain,  and  their  teaching  without  heart  or 
force,  because,  like  parrots,  they  catch  up  and 
repeat  what  others  may  have  insight  enough  to 
warrant  their  asserting,  but  they  have  not.  To 
correspond  with  one's  own  personal  gift  of  faith 
is  to  realize  one's  vocation  ;  and,  by  the  develop- 
ment of  the  individual  points  of  view,  inside  the 
common  '  tradition,'  the  fullness  and  richness  of 
the  corporate  faith  is  secured. 

The  cohesion  of  the  body  lies  in  each  one's 
realizing  his  own  gift,  and  also  reverencing  that 
of  others.  Here  is  humility.  Humility  is  not 
self-contempt,  or  cringing  to  others.  To  realize 
one's  own  gift,  one's  jDwn  relation  to  God,  gives 
to  each  man  a  dignity,  a  power  to  stand  upright 
and  face  the  world.  The  sovereign  Master  and 
Giver  has  given  me  my  own  life  and  my  own 
gifts.  He  is  responsible  for  the  existence  which 
He  gave  me,  and  I  am  not  to  shame  Him  by 
shrinking  from  making  the  best  of  it.  But  also 
humility  is,  in  all  relations,  truth  about  ourselves. 
It  is  truth  about  ourselves  as  regards  God,  who 


112        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

is  simply  the  giver  of  whatever  we  have  and  are ; 
and  it  is  truth  about  ourselves  as  regards  our 
fellow^  men — our  own  gifts  being  justly  appraised 
only  when  they  are  regarded  as  means  of  serving 
the  body  as  a  whole,  without  any  self-aggrandize- 
ment, with  a  due  respect  to  the  gifts  of  others, 
and  even  a  positive  will  to  let  them  have  higher 
place  than  ourselves. 

Indeed  we  shall  do  well  to  meditate  deeply  on 
this.  What  good  work  is  there  which  is  not  in 
more  or  less  continual  danger  of  suffering,  or 
even  being  abandoned,  because  fellow  Christians, 
zealous  fellow  Christians,  will  plainly,  and  it 
must  be  wilfully,  yield  to  the  ambition  to  be 
first :  will  not  be  content  to  be  second  or  third : 
will  not  do  the  unobtrusive  work :  will  think 
'  How  can  I  shine,'  rather  than  '  How  can  I 
serve  '  ?  In  fact,  how  very  unwilhng  we  are  to 
recognize,  in  our  ideals  of  education,  and  in  our 
theory  of  grown  life,  that  ambition,  in  the  strict 
sense  of  the  word — the  desire  to  obtain  distinc- 
tion for  ourselves,  as  distinct  from  the  desire  to 
serv^e — is  not  a  motive  which  Christianity  can 
sanction,  or  from  which  it  can  hope  for  a  blessing 

We  linger  lovingly,  wistfully,  on  the  picture 
of  the  corporate  Hfe  of  a  Christian  community. 
Has  it  vanished  from  the  earth,  this  real  fraternal 


The  community  spirit  113 

living,  'high  and  low,  rich  and  poor,  one  with 
another,'  each  supplementing  the  deficiencies  of 
the  other,  and  receiving  of  their  fullness  ?  May 
we  not  do  something  more  than  we  are  doing  to 
realize  it  in  our  congregations  or  parishes?  Is 
nearly  enough  emphasis  laid  on  the  social 
relationship  of  each  congregation  of  fellow 
worshippers  or  each  local  church  ? 

Dimly  through  the  mist  of  ages  in  old  church- 
wardens' accounts,  in  the  rare  instances  where 
they  have  been  preserved  from  days  before  the 
Reformation,  we  discern  what  a  really  fraternal, 
self-governing  and  mutually  co-operative  com- 
munity the  mediaeval  English  parish  was.  Let 
me  extract  a  few  sentences  from  the  excellent 
preface^  which  Bishop  Hobhouse  prefixed  to  an 
edition  of  the  surviving  Churchwardens  Accounts 
of  a  number  of  Somersetshire  parishes. 

*  The  (parish)  community  was  completely  or- 
ganized with  a  constitution  which  recognized  the 
rights  of  the  whole  and  of  every  adult  member 
to  a  voice  in  self-government,  but  kept  the  self- 
governing  community  under  a  system  of  inspec- 
tion and  (if  need  should  be)  restraint  from  central 
authority.'  'The  whole  adult  population  were 
accounted  parishioners,  and  had  an  equal  voice 

'  Somersetshire  Records,  vol.  iv,  1890. 
II.  I 


114        ^^^  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

when  assembled  for  consultation  under  the 
rector.  Seeing  that  both  sexes  served  the  office 
of  warden,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  both  had 
a  vote.' 

The  strongly  existing  spirit  of  good  will  and 
pride  in  the  parish  church  found  all  the  necessary 
funds  for  the  maintaining  of  the  church  and 
the  services,  and  for  the  provision  of  often  a 
sumptuous  and  rich  treasury  of  ornaments.  The 
needs  of  the  Church  were  met  generally  by  the 
local  industr}^  of  '  such  as  were  wise-hearted ' — 
builders,  carpenters,  workers  in  gold  and  silver, 
bell-founders,  embroiderers,  writers,  illuminators, 
book-binders,  and  others. 

Hard  by  the  church  the  church-house  was  the 
centre  of  the  popular  recreations  of  the  holy  day 
or  holida3\ 

The  parish  elected  and  paid  jts  own  officers, 
except  the  rector,  and  the  affairs  and  ornaments 
of  the  church,  even  in  part  the  arrangement  of 
the  services,  were  under  the  government,  not  of 
the  rector,  but  of  the  parish  meeting,  of  which  he 
was  president,  under  the  restraining  hand  of  the 
local  dean  and  archdeacon. 

The  support  of  the  poor  or  disabled  was  a 
wholly  voluntary  matter.  *  The  brotherhood  tie 
was  so  strongly  realized  by  the  community,  that 


The  commimity  spirit  115 

the  weaker  ones  were  succoured  by  the  stronger 
as  out  of  a  family  store.' 

'  All  the  tendency  of  the  feudal  system,  working 
through  the  machinery  of  the  manorial  court, 
was  to  keep  the  people  doivn.  All  the  tendency  of 
the  parochial  system,  working  through  the  parish 
council,  holding  its  assemblies  in  the  churches, 
where  the  people  met  on  equal  terms  as  children 
and  servants  of  the  living  God,  and  members  of 
one  body  in  Christ  Jesus,  was  to  lift  the  people  up! 
In  these  assemblies  there  w^as  no  distinction 
between  lord  and  vassal,  high  and  low,  rich  and 
poor ;  in  them  the  people  learnt  the  worth  of 
being  free.  Here  were  the  schools  in  which,  in 
the  slow  course  of  centuries,  they  were  disciplined 
to  self-help,  self-reliance  and  self-respect  ^ 

No  doubt  these  descriptions  of  mediaeval 
parish  life  represent  an  ideal  very  imperfectly 
realized.  But  is  it  not  an  ideal  we  need  to 
recover?  Is  there  not  a  call  for  Church  reform, 
both  moral  and  formal,  to  restore  to  us  the 
community  Hfe  of  our  parishes,  and  fill  St.  Paul's 
language  again  with  its  primary  and  natural 
meaning  ? 

'  Dr.  Jessop,  '  Parish  Life  in  England  before  the  Great  Pillage,' 
Nineteenth  Century^  Jan.  1898,  p.  55  ;  cf.  also  Dom  Gasquet  on 
*  The  Layman  in  the  Mediaeval  Period,'  Tablet^  Sept.  2,  1899. 

12 


ii6        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


DIVISION  V.  §  3.    Chapter  XIII.  1-7. 

The  Chnsiians  and  the  imperial  power. 

It  is  possible  that  the  thought  of  the  innocent 
victim  of  injustice  and  wrong  waiting  upon  the 
divine  wrath,  brings  to  St.  Paul's  mind  the  idea 
of  the  State  which  exists  to  represent  divine 
justice  in  the  world,  and  minister  divine  wrath 
on  behalf  of  the  innocent.  But,  whether  this 
particular  connexion  of  thought  was  really  in 
St.  Paul's  mind  or  no,  at  any  rate  the  previous 
section  has  made  it  plain  that  the  *  love  of  the 
brethren '  must  extend  itself  to  become  a  right 
relation  to  all  men,  whether  Christians  or  not  ^ 
In  particular,  therefore,  the  relation  of  the 
Christians  to  the  imperial  authority  could  not 
fail  to  be  a  matter  which  required  attention  and 
apostolic  counsel.    The  Jews,  whose  theocratic 

'  Cf.  2  Pet.  i.  7,  '  In  3'our  love  of  the  brethren  supply  love,'  i.  e. 
let  the  temper  bred  inside  the  closer  bond  of  Christian  fellowship 
extend  itself  universally. 


Christians  and  imperial  officers    117 

principles  made  submission  to  government  by 
'  the  uncircumcised '  at  least  a  real  abandonment 
of  a  religious  ideal  \  had  always  an  instinctive 
tendency  to  rebeUion  ;  and  the  Christian  church 
built  upon  Judaism  might  easily  have  inherited 
this  instinct.  The  catholic  church  of  the  new 
covenant,  might  have  claimed  to  be  a  theocracy 
like  that  of  the  old.  Especially  at  Rome,  where 
the  Jews  w^ere  a  vast  and  formidable  body  who 
had  recently  given  trouble  and  been  expelled  -, 
the  attitude  of  the  Christians,  who  were  identi- 
fied with  them,  might  easily  be  misunderstood. 
Or  on  the  other  hand  the  Jews  themselves,  at 
Rome  as  at  Thessalonica^,  might  represent  the 
Christians  as  dislo3'al  to  Caesar.  Moreover, 
apart  from  all  unjustified  slanders,  the  spirit  of 
the  '  fifth  monarchy  men '  has  seldom  been 
altogether  absent  from  periods  of  Christian 
enthusiasm ;  and  the  restless  and  undisciplined 

^  Deut.  xvii.  15,  '  Thou  ma3'est  not  put  a  foreigner  over  thee, 
which  is  not  thy  brother,' 

^  Acts  xviii.  2.  '  Claudius  had  commanded  all  the  Jews  to 
depart  from  Rome,'  cf.  Suetonius,  Claud.  25.  '  The  Jews  who 
had  been  persistently  breaking  into  disturbances  at  the  instigation 
of  Chrestus  (Christ  ?)  he  expelled  from  Rome.'  We  cannot  cer- 
tainly explain  these  words,  but  St.  Paul  knew  all  about  the  occur- 
rence from  Priscilla  and  Aquila,  whom  the  expulsion  had  brought 
across  his  path  at  Corinth. 

5  Acts  xvii.  7. 


ii8        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

tendencies  at  Thessalonica  \  which  the  mistaken 
expectation  of  the  immediate  second  coming  of 
Christ  had  encouraged,  were  a  sign  that  Christians 
might  easily  find  it  difficult  to  settle  down  as 
good  citizens  in  the  great  empire  of  the  world. 

St.  Paul  therefore,  here  and  elsewhere,  would 
make  it  quite  plain  that  the  catholic  church,  if 
it  is  like  the  ancient  Israel,  is  like  it  only  as  it 
was  in  exile — when  the  children  of  Israel  were 
bidden  to  be  good  citizens  of  the  Bab3donian 
empire,  and  to  seek  the  peace  of  the  city 
whither  God  had  caused  them  to  be  carried 
away  captive,  and  to  pray  unto  the  Lord  for  it, 
for  in  the  peace  thereof  the}^  should  have  peace  ^. 
Thus  the  Church  was  not  a  theocrac}',  but  a 
*  settlement  of  strangers  and  exiles  ^,'  waiting 
for  the  visible  establishment  of  the  kingdom  or 
city  of  God,  and  meanwhile  maintaining  a  polity 
or  ordered  social  life  of  their  own,  but  on  a  volun- 
tary and  catholic  (or  non-national)  basis.  There- 
fore, so  long  as  God  maintains  '  the  present 
world,'  they  must  be  good  citizens  of  whatever 
earthly  state  they  happen  to  live  under.  On  this 
basis,  then,  St.  Paul  reminds  each  single  person 

'   I  Thess.  iv.  ii  ;  v.  14;  2''Thess.  iii.  6. 
'  Jer.  xxix.  7;  cf.  i  Tim.  ii.  2. 

^  I  Pet.  ii.  II.     The  word  for  such  a  'settlement  of  strangers,' 
paroecia,  has  become,  by  a  suggestive  history,  our  '  parish.' 


Christians  and  imperial  officers    119 

of  the  duty  of  political  lo3^alty.  The  earthly 
state  is  of  God's  establishing,  as  well  as  the 
kingdom  of  Christ,  and  fulfils  a  divine  purpose 
with  divine  authorit}^  It  exists  to  suppress 
moral  outrage  and  lawlessness  \  to  maintain 
justice  and  right.  Its  officers  are  God's  minis- 
ters (as  truly  as  the  officers  of  the  Church,  though 
in  a  different  order),  and  must  be  obe3^ed  ac- 
cordingly, under  peril  not  only  of  civil  punish- 
ment for  disobedience,  but  under  peril  of  divine 
judgement  also,  and  as  a  matter  of  conscience. 
The  good  man,  and  therefore  the  good  Christian, 
has  nothing  to  fear  from  the  empire  or  its 
officers.  And  he  will  readily,  and  as  a  matter  of 
conscience,  pay  his  tribute  as  a  subject,  and  his 
taxes  as  a  citizen,  to  the  proper  authorities,  and 
give  to  each  imperial  officer  the  respect  which 
is  his  due. 

Let  every  soul  be  in  subjection  to  the  higher  powers  : 
for  there  is  no  power  but  of  God  ;  and  the  powers  that  be 
are  ordained  of  God.  Therefore  he  that  resisteth  the 
power,  withstandeth  the  ordinance  of  God  :  and  the^^ 
that  withstand  shall  receive  to  themselves  judgement. 
For  rulers  are  not  a  terror  to  the  good  work,  but  to  the 
evil.     And  wouldest  thou  have  no  fear  of  the  power  ?    do 

'  Cf.  2  Thess.  ii.  6.  '  That  which  restraineth'  tlie  outbreak  of  law- 
lessness is  (almost  certainl}')  the  empire,  and  '  he  that  restraineth  ' 
(ver.  7)  the  emperor. 


120        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

that  which  is  good,  and  thou  shalt  have  praise  from  the 
same  :  for  he  is  a  minister  of  God  to  thee  for  good.  But 
if  thou  do  that  which  is  evil,  be  afraid;  for  he  beareth  not 
the  sword  in  vain :  for  he  is  a  minister  of  God,  an  avenger 
for  wrath  to  him  that  doeth  evil.  Wherefore  jj^^  must  needs 
be  in  subjection,  not  only  because  of  the  wrath,  but  also 
for  conscience  sake.  For  for  this  cause  ye  pay  tribute 
also ;  for  they  are  ministers  of  God's  service,  attending 
continually  upon  this  very  thing.  Render  to  all  their 
dues  :  tribute  to  whom  tribute  is  due ;  custom  to  whom 
custom  ;  fear  to  whom  fear ;  honour  to  whom  honour. 

Our  Lord,  by  His  whole  bearing  towards 
Jewish  nationahsm  and  by  His  clear  prophecy  of 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  as  well  as  by  His 
particular  injunction  to  '  render  unto  Caesar  the 
things  that  were  Caesar's,'  had  made  it  evident 
to  His  disciples  that  the  sceptre  had  departed 
from  Judah,  and  had  determined  the  attitude  of 
Christians  towards  the  empire.  They  could  not 
indeed  be  as  other  inhabitants  of  the  empire,  for 
they  were  waiting,  and  praying,  and  working,  for 
the  visible  establishment  of  a  city  and  kingdom 
of  God  on  earth— little  as  either  the  '  times  and 
seasons,'  or  the  character  and  manner,  of  that  city 
and  kingdom  had  been  revealed  to  them.  Thus 
the  Roman  empire  could  not  but  be  in  their  eyes 
a  kingdom  of  this  world  destined  for  overthrow. 
But  it  was  by  the  methods  of  meekness,  and  by 
purely  spiritual  weapons,  that  the  kingdom  of 


Christians  and  imperial  officers    121 

God  was  to  come,  and  the  great  overthrow,  what- 
ever it  should  prove  to  be,  was  to  be  effected. 
This  at  least  was  certain ;  and  meanwhile  the 
Roman  empire  represented  the  divme  principle 
of  authority  and  order,  and  must  be  obeyed. 

St.  Paul  no  doubt  had,  more  than  any  other 
apostle,  a  real  feeling  for  the  empire  and  the  city 
of  which  he  was  a  citizen.  Moreover,  he  saw 
in  the  organization  of  the  empire  a  great  frame- 
work and  vehicle  for  the  establishment  and 
spread  of  the  catholic  church.  And  hitherto 
certainly  (at  least,  since  the  fatal  moment  of 
Pilate's  weakness)  the  Church  had  continually 
experienced  the  assistance  of  the  imperial 
authorities.  It  was  a  misused  spiritual  2Mi\\QX\\.y ^ 
before  which  the  protest  had  to  be  made,  *  We 
must  obey  God  rather  than  man  \'  It  was  the 
Jewish  authorities  who  persecuted  the  Church. 
It  was  the  Jewish  king  who  put  James  to  death. 
At  Paphos,  Thessalonica,  Corinth,  Ephesus,  the 
imperial  authorities  had  been  more  or  less 
friendly,  and  even  at  Philippi  they  had  been 
reduced  to  an  attitude  of  apology  by  the  bare 
mention  of  Roman  citizenship.  St.  Paul's 
experiences,  therefore,  had  prepared  him  to 
*  appeal   unto    Caesar,'   and   to   expect    justice 

'  Acts  V.  29. 


122        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

and  freedom  for  himself  and  his  cause.  Even 
the  beginnings  of  the  experience  of  imperial 
hostility  and  persecution  did  not  quash  or  even 
weaken  this  attitude  in  St.  Peter  ^  St.  Peter 
and  St.  Paul  idealize  the  empire  almost  as  if  it 
could  do  no  wrong,  and  the  righteous  had 
nothing  to  fear  from  it.  Of  course,  when  this 
expectation  had  been  rudely  shattered — when 
the  imperial  authority  had  come  chiefly  to  mean 
the  persecution  of  the  saints— an  opposite  sort 
of  idealism  takes  place,  and  Rome  appears  as 
the  great  '  beast '  of  violence  in  the  Apocalypse 
of  John.  Both  idealizations  represent  truth — 
the  truth  of  what  the  State  is  meant  to  be  on 
the  one  side,  and  of  what  it  may  become  on 
the  other.  But  after  considerable  experience  of 
persecution,  Clement  of  Rome  is  still  full  of 
admiration  for  the  divine  order  of  the  imperial 
rule,  and  recognizes  the  duty  of  obedience  to 
his  '  rulers  and  governors  upon  earth,'  side  by 
side  with  the  duty  of  obedience  to  '  God's  al- 
mighty and  most  excellent  name ' ;  and  as  it  is 
God  who  has  given  the  rulers  their  authorit}^, 
he  prays  for  grace  to  submit  to  them,  and  offers 
rich  pra3^er  for  their  welfare  and  that  of  the 
empire.     And  the  spirit  lived  on  in  the  Christian 

'    I  Pet.  ii.  13-17' 


Christians  and  imperial  officers    123 

church  through  all  the  persecutions,  and  the 
apologists  for  Christianity  loved  to  protest 
their  loyalty  to  the  empire,  and  to  think  of  their 
church  as  '  the  soul  of  the  world,'  maintaining 
it  by  prayer  and  virtue  in  the  midst  of  impiet}^ 
and  corruption. 

In  England  this  passage  has  often  been  put 
to  two  conspicuousl}^  unjustifiable  uses.  First, 
it  was  the  stronghold  of  the  maintainers  of  *  the 
divine  right  of  kings '  and  of  '  passive  obe- 
dience.' In  reality  it  asserts  the  divine  right  of 
civil  authorit}^,  but  not  of  any  particular  kind  of 
civil  authority.  Indeed  the  government  of  the 
empire  was  still  nominally  a  republic  in  its 
fundamental  forms,  though  it  was  becoming  a 
despotism  in  fact.  And  supposing  the  senate 
and  people  had— as  is  of  course  conceivable — 
reasserted  their  authority  over  their  '  emperors,' 
or  military  officers,  the  Christian  doctrine  of 
divine  right  would  have  afforded  no  guidance  as 
to  which  of  the  claimants  to  authority  had  the 
divine  will  on  its  side.  What  is  barely  asserted 
is  the  divine  right  of  the  existing  civil  authority, 
democratic  or  regal.  And  while  our  passage 
exalts  the  normal  duty  of  obedience,  it  suggests 
no  answer  to  the  question — Is  there  not  a  point 
where  a  government  so  manifestly  fails  to  main- 


124        T^^^  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

tain  the  divine  order  in  the  world,  or  to  repre- 
sent the  will  of  God  and  the  best  interests  of  the 
people,  that  it  deserves  to  be  put  an  end  to  ?  At 
such  a  point  Christianity  can  only  serve  to  rein- 
force the  natural  instincts  of  justice  and  right. 

And  again,  the  words, '  the  powers  that  be  are 
ordained  of  God  :  therefore  he  that  resisteth  the 
power  withstandeth  the  ordinance  of  God,'  have 
often  been  used  in  England  to  justify  a  claim  on 
behalf  of  the  State  to  coerce  and  govern  the 
Church  and  the  consciences  of  men  in  spiritual 
matters.  But  such  an  idea  is  utterly  alien  to 
the  mind  of  the  New  Testament.  In  the  matters 
which  concern  our  spiritual  salvation,  the 
authority  which  is  to  disciphne  and  control  us 
is  the  binding  and  loosing,  absolving  and  retain- 
ing, authority  which  is  entrusted  not  to  the 
State,  but  to  the  Church.  Attempts  are  re- 
corded in  history  on  the  part  of  the  State  to 
crush  out  the  Church,  and  on  the  part  of  the 
Church  to  usurp  the  authority  of  the  State  and 
use  its  weapons.  Such  attempts,  we  trust,  be- 
long to  past  history.  An  attempt,  too,  specially 
identified  with  England,  has  been  made  to 
identify  a  national  Church  and  State  as  only 
different  aspects  of  the  same  societ}^,  so  that  the 
government  of  the  national  Church  can  be  more 


Christians  and  imperial  officers    125 

or  less  fused  in  that  of  the  State.  But  whatever 
may  be  said  of  such  an  attempt  in  the  past,  in 
our  modern  England  the  plain  facts  of  the 
political  and  religious  situation  are  flatly  repug- 
nant to  it ;  and  there  can  evidently  be  no 
reasonable  religious  government  in  the  Church 
of  England  till  it  is  conducted  again  in  obe- 
dience to  the  fundamental  Christian  principle  that 
our  national  and  local  Church  is  part  of  a  great 
catholic  society,  which  Christ  endowed  with  an 
independent  spiritual  authority,  and  a  law  and 
constitution  and  ministers  of  its  own.  The 
State  may  need  an  established  national  church 
as  much  as  ever  to  enable  it  to  fulfil  its  highest 
functions,  but  any  '  Establishment '  in  these  days 
must  be  consistent  with  the  fullest  recognition 
of  the  spiritual  and  pohtical  liberties  of  those 
members  of  the  State  who  belong  to  other 
religious  bodies,  and  also  must  be  based  upon 
recognition  that  the  Church  and  State  are 
fundamentally  distinct,  and  relatively  inde- 
pendent  societies. 

But  it  behoves  us  Churchmen,  not  only  to 
assert  the  spiritual  liberties  of  the  Church,  but 
also  to  realize  a  great  deal  more  fully  than  we 
do,  the  divine  authority  of  the  civil  ministers  and 
civil  laws  in  their  own  department.     The  State 


126        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

exists  to  embody  and  represent  in  the  world  the 
divine  justice,  which  is  to  be  the  basis  of  the 
government  of  men.  Its  ministers — magistrates, 
legislators,  officers  of  justice  — are  'God's  minis- 
ters ' :  laws  which  are  passed  by  the  State  in 
fulfilment  of  its  divine  mission — laws  intended 
to  maintain  the  health  and  prosperity  of  the 
people  as  a  whole  — have  a  divine  sanction ; 
and  we  Churchmen  can  only  be  what  the 
Church  should  be,  'the  soul  of  the  world,'  if 
we  make  it  a  matter  of  conscience,  a  great  deal 
more  deliberately  than  it  is  at  present  with 
most  of  us,  to  aid  vigorously  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  good  laws  which  already  exist, 
national  and  municipal,  and  to  promote  intelli- 
gently and  enthusiastically  the  purposes  of  civil 
government  by  helping  towards  better  laws  ;  so 
that  our  government,  as  a  w^hole,  may  become 
a  continually  completed  image  of  the  equitable 
and  impartial  righteousness  of  God. 


TJie  summary  debt  -     127 


DIVISION  V.  v^  4.     Chapter  XIII.  8-10. 

The  siuiujiaiy  debt. 

Christians  are  willingly  to  pa}-  tribute  and 
tax  as  a  debt,  a  thing  due  in  God's  sight  to  His 
ministers.  But  this  obligation  is  a  specimen  of 
innumerable  obligations  which  we  owe  to  our 
'neighbours' — debts  onl3Mimited  b}' human  need. 
And  the  Christian  is  to  take  a  wide  view  of  his 
obhgations,  and  to  let  there  be  no  legitimate 
claim  upon  him  unfulfilled,  no  debt  unpaid, 
except  the  one  which  a  man  ought  always  to  be 
paying  and  still  to  be  owing,  for  it  is  infinite— the 
debt  of  love.  Here,  in  loving  each  other  man 
with  the  same  real  regard  to  his  personal 
interests  as  we  devote  to  our  own,  is  the  satis- 
faction of  the  moral  law.  All  the  particular 
'  commandments '—those  of  the  Second  Table, 
and  any  other  there  may  be— are  comprehended 
in  this  one.  For  love  can  do  no  harm  to  any 
other,  and  can  therefore  break  no  command- 
ment. 


128        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

Owe  no  man  anything,  save  to  love  one  another :  for 
he  that  loveth  his  neighbour  hath  fulfilled  the  law.  For 
this,  Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery,  Thou  shalt  not 
kill,  Thou  shalt  not  steal,  Thou  shalt  not  covet,  and  if 
there  be  any  other  commandment,  it  is  summed  up  in 
this  word,  namely,  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thy- 
self. Love  worketh  no  ill  to  his  neighbour:  love  there- 
fore is  the  fulfilment  of  the  law. 

St.  Paul  gives  here  a  very  noticeable  expan- 
sion to  the  idea  of  not  being  in  debt.  In  its 
literal  sense  we  have  all  of  us  a  horror  of  it, 
at  least  in  theory. 

'  No  debtor's  hands  are  clean 
However  white  they  be.' 

We  must  both  let  that  theoretic  horror  of  debt 
dominate  our  practice  in  money  matters,  and 
also  expand  our  idea  of  ^  debts.'  According  to 
Christ's  teaching,  the  priest  and  Levite  did  not 
pay  their  debt  to  their  Samaritan  neighbour, 
because  they  thought  him  a  stranger  with  no 
claim  on  them.  Dives  ignored  his  rich  man's 
debt  to  Lazarus.  Of  those  who  are  to  appear 
on  the  left  hand  of  Christ's  judgement-seat,  each 
will  be  condemned  because  he  never  realized  his 
debt  to  Christ  in  the  persons  of  all  those  who 
had  needs  to  which  he  might  have  ministered. 
St.  Paul,  as  an  apostle,  acknowledged  his  debt 


Tlie  siumnary  debt  129 

to  all  the  Gentile  world  \  and  we  members  of  a 
church,  catholic  in  idea,  but  as  yet  so  far  from 
catholic  in  fact — we  Englishmen,  members  of  an 
imperial  and  spreading  race,  responsible  for  the 
name  of  Christ  all  over  the  world — have  a  por- 
tentous and  lamentably  unfulfilled  debt  to  the 
races  of  Africa  and  India,  and  to  the  whole 
world. 

We  can  all  think  of  manifold  debts— to  the 
lonely  whom  we  might  visit,  the  misunderstood 
whom  we  might  sympathize  with,  the  ignorant 
whom  we  might  teach,  the  weak  and  oppressed 
whom  we  might  support  and  combine,  the  sinful 
whom  we  might  convert  and  establish  in  good 
living  ;  so  many  debts  to  family  and  friends ;  so 
many  debts  to  Englishmen  and  fellow  Christians, 
to  Africans  and  Asiatics.  Is  it  not  bewildering 
even  to  attempt  to  realize  our  debts  ?  And  yet, 
let  a  man  make  a  beginning,  and  all  will  be  well. 
Let  him  steadily  set  himself  to  behave  towards 
those  whom  he  employs  or  those  who  employ 
him,  towards  his  domestic  servants  or  his  masters, 
towards  railway  porters  and  shop  assistants 
and  others  who  minister  to  his  convenience,  as 
being  men  and  women  with  the  same  right  to 
courteous  treatment,  and  to  a  real  opportunity  to 

^  Rom.  i.  14. 
II.  K 


J  30        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

make  the  best  of  themselves,  as  he  has  him- 
self; let  him  steadily  refuse  to  'exploit'  those 
immediately  concerned  with  him,  or  treat  them 
as  merely  means  to  his  ends  or  instruments  of 
his  convenience ;  let  him  thus  realize  his  debts 
to  his  nearest  '  neighbours,'  and  the  whole  idea 
of  humanity,  of  brotherhood,  will  be  deepened 
and  made  real  to  him.  Serving  the  few,  he  will 
come  to  serve  the  many.  His  prayers  will  go 
before  his  actions,  and  enlarge  their  scope.  He 
will  get  a  habit  of  considerateness  and  thought- 
fulness  for  others,  as  belonging  to  Christ,  which 
w^ill  express  itself  habitually  towards  all,  and 
especially  the  weak.  His  'neighbour'  will 
come  to  mean,  as  in  our  Lord's  parable  and  in 
St.  Paul's  expression  in  this  place,  any  '  other 
man  \'  And  in  our  days  when  the  old  personal 
relations  of  masters  to  workers  have  been  so 
largely  merged  in  the  relation  of  companies  to 
unions  or  to  men  and  women  in  masses,  we 
shall  never  allow  ourselves  to  forget  that  combi- 
nations are  combinations  of  individuals,  and  that 
neither  individual  responsibility,  nor  responsi- 
bility for  the  individual,  can  be  obHterated  by 
union  or  by  numbers. 
St.  Paul,  we  notice,  is  here  plainly  reproduc- 

'  ver.  8,  '  his  neighbours  ' :  margin,  '  the  other.' 


TJie  smmnary  debt  131 

ing  our  Lord's  saying  about  love  and  the  law  ^ ; 
and  he  would  seem  to  have  the  teaching  of  the 
parable  about  the  Good  Samaritan  in  his  mind ; 
as  in  the  previous  section  the  sa3ang  '  Render 
unto  Caesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar's,'  and  in 
the  end  of  the  preceding  one  (xii.  14,  19)  the 
prohibition  of  vengeance  and  the  injunction  of 
love  to  enemies  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 
St.  Paul's  ethical  teaching  is  in  fact  found  to  be 
throughout  based  on  our  Lord's,  whether  our 
Lord's  words  were  with  him  in  a  written  form 
or  came  to  him  simply  in  the  oral  tradition. 

And  we  do  well  to  remember,  as  we  read  this 
familiar  passage,  that  here  is  the  centre  and 
kernel  of  Christianity.  It  is  the  revelation  of 
a  new  and  universal  duty,  based  on  a  revealed 
relationship  of  all  men  to  a  common  Father  :  the 
duty  which  lies  upon  all  men  of  loving  all  men, 
because  God  loves  all  men  with  a  father's  love, 
or  rather  because  God  is  love,  and  only  by  the 
life  of  love  can  we  share  His  fellowship  2.     The 

'   Matt.  xxii.  40  ;  cf.  Gal.  v.  14,  and  James  ii.  8. 

-  It  has  been  commonly  said  that  Christianity  ahnost  created  a 
new  word  to  express  the  new  duty.  But  this  now  appears  not  to 
be  strictly  the  case.  Agape,  love,  is  a  word  unknown  indeed  to 
classical  writers,  but  it  is  found  in  the  popular  speech  of  Alexandria 
in  the  second  century  b.  c.  See  Deissmann,  Bibelstudien  (Marburg, 
1895),  p.  80.  (I  was  referred  to  this  work  by  Dr.  Bernard,  PaAfo/rr/ 

K  2 


132        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

Christian  ^enthusiasm  for  humanity'  has  thus 
its  roots  in  a  disclosure  of  the  character  of  God, 
and  of  His  mind  towards  every  man. 

Epistles,  p.  24.)  Hence,  i.  e.  from  the  popular  speech  of  Greek 
Egypt,  it  passed  into  the  Greek  Bible  and  so  into  Christianity. 


The  day  appi^oaching  133 


DIVISION  V.  §5.    Chapter  XIII.  11-14. 

The  approach  of  the  day. 

And  the  motive  for  paying  our  debts,  in  this 
wide  sense,  is  that  we  must  '  agree  with  our 
adversary  quickly,  while  we  are  with  him  in  the 
way/  for  the  day  of  account  is  at  hand.  This 
worldly  world  lies  asleep  to  the  spiritual  reali- 
ties, but  its  short  night — the  time  of  darkness — 
is  nearly  over.  The  great  deliverance  is  nearer 
to  us  than  when  we  first  became  Christians. 
The  day  of  the  Lord  is  almost  dawning.  Let  us 
see  to  it  then  that  all  that  is  only  fit  for  the  dark- 
ness is  stripped  off  us  :  that  we  are  suitably 
equipped  for  the  day,  so  that  when  it  suddenly 
dawns  it  shall  not  put  us  to  shame.  Sensual 
lusts  and  loveless  passions  indulged — gross  sins, 
such  as  none  of  the  Christian  communities  had 
quite  got  rid  of— will  appear  improper  conduct 
indeed  when  the  sun  rises.  And  there  is 
only  one  garment  proper  for  the  da}^;  it  is  the 
garment  of  Christ's  righteousness,  or  rather 
of  Christ  Himself,  with  whom  we  must  invest 


134        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

ourselves.  As  for  our  lower  nature,  it  is  to  be 
our  servant  merely — not  a  master,  whose  clam- 
orous demands  we  are  to  study  to  satisfy. 

'And  this,  knowing  the  season,  that  now  it  is  high 
time  for  3^ou  to  awake  out  of  sleep  :  for  now  is  salvation 
nearer  to  us  than  when  we  first  believed.  The  night  is 
far  spent,  and  the  day  is  at  hand  :  let  us  therefore  cast  off 
the  works  of  darkness,  and  let  us  put  on  the  armour  of 
light.  Let  us  walk  honestly,  as  in  the  day  ;  not  in  revel- 
ling and  drunkenness,  not  in  chambering  and  wanton- 
ness, not  in  strife  and  jealousy.  But  put  ye  on  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  make  not  provision  for  the  flesh,  to 
fulfil  the  lusts  thereof. 

St.  Paul,  no  doubt,  was  still  in  eager  expecta- 
tion of  the  immediate  second  coming  of  Christ ; 
and  that  expectation  has  proved  mistaken. 
Now  our  Lord  plainly  did  not  mean  His  dis- 
ciples to  know  when  His  judgement  was  to  be 
made  manifest,  and  St.  Paul  apparently  recog- 
nized this\  so  that  his  immediate  anticipation  of 
the  end  can  never  have  been  part  of  his  faith — 
never  more  than  the  reflection  of  the  eager 
desire  which  filled  the  heart  of  the  Church. 
On  the  other  hand,  our  Lord  did  mean  His 
disciples  to  go  on  expecting   Him.    Thus  St. 

1  I  Thess.  V.  2  :  '  The  day  of  the  Lord  so  cometh  as  a  thief  in 
the  night.'  To  know  this  is  to  have  answer  enough  to  questions 
about  the  times  and  seasons  of  the  coming  (v.  i). 


The  day  approaching  135 

Paul's  admonition  is  as  applicable  now  as  ever. 
The  future  of  the  world  and  of  each  nation  and 
institution  is  precarious :  things  which  seem 
solid  and  strong  may  crumble  and  melt ;  how 
soon  God  is  to  make  plain  His  judgements,  in 
part  or  on  the  whole,  w^e  do  not  know ;  when 
each  one  of  us  is  to  pass  by  death  to  the  great 
account  we  do  not  know.  There  is  no  reason- 
able attitude  towards  the  unknown  coming  of 
judgement  except  to  be  ready,  and,  though  the 
darkness  of  the  aHenated  and  godless  world  is 
all  around  us,  to  live  as  children  of  the  light 
eagerly  expecting  the  dawning  of  the  day  \ 

And  to  meet  Christ  we  must  be  like  Christ. 
And  to  be  like  Christ  we  must  be  in  Christ, 
clothed  with  His  righteousness,  invested  with 
His  new  nature,  fighting  with  the  weapons  of 
His  victorious  manhood.  The  '  evil '  which  is 
in  ourselves,  the  unregulated  flesh,  we  can  only 
'  overcome  with  good  '—the  good  which  is  Jesus 
Himself:  for  it  is  no  longer  we  that  live  in  our 
bare  selves,  but  Christ  that  liveth  in  us.  We 
are  baptized  into  Him,  we  possess  His  spirit, 
we  eat  His  flesh  and  drink  His  blood.  What 
remains  is   practically  to   clothe   ourselves   in 

^  It  is  interesting  to  compare  this  passage  with  the  closely 
similar  one  of  Thess.  v.  1-4.    Cf.  Eph.  v.  14  ff.  ;  vi.  n. 


136        TJw  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

Him\  appropriating  and  drawing  out  into  our- 
selves by  acts  of  our  will  His  very  present 
help  in  trouble.  So  can  we  become  like  Him, 
and  be  fitted  to  see  Him  as  He  is  ^. 

This  passage  played  a  memorable  part  in 
St.  Augustine's  life ;  for  when  the  child's  voice 
had  bidden  him  '  open  and  read,'  these  were  the 
words  upon  which  he  opened,  and  which  sealed 
his  conversion  to  the  faith  he  served  so  nobly — 
'  not  in  rioting  and  drunkenness,  .  .  .  but  put  ye 
on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.'  '  I  had  no  wish,'  he 
tells  us,  '  to  read  any  further,  nor  was  there  any 
need.  For  immediately  at  the  end  of  this  sen- 
tence, as  if  a  light  of  certaint}^  had  been  poured 
into  my  heart,  all  the  shadows  of  doubt  were 
scattered^.' 

^  Christ  is  '  put  on '  in  baptism  by  all,  Gal.  iii.  27  ;  but  we  all 
still  need  to  appropriate  what  we  have  received,  and  so  '  put 
Him  on  '  for  ourselves  ;  cf.  Eph.  iv.  24  ;  Col.  iii.  12. 

^  See  app.  note  G,  p.  238,  for  an  admirable  prayer  by  Jeremy 
Taylor  based  on  this  thought. 

^  Conf.  viii.  12. 


Toleration  in  nnessentials         137 


DIVISION  V.  §  6.    Chapter  XIV.  1-23. 

Mutual  toleration. 

St.  Paul's  practical  exhortations  show  no 
definite  scheme,  but  flow  out  of  one  another  in 
a  natural  sequence.  He  began  with  the  funda- 
mental moral  disposition  required  by  life  in  the 
Christian  community  (xii).  He  proceeded  to  the 
relation  between  the  Christian  community  and 
the  government  of  the  world  outside  (xiii.  1-7). 
This  led  him  to  lay  brief  and  vigorous  emphasis 
upon  the  universal  range  of  Christian  obligation 
(8-10),  and  the  motive  which  is  to  make  Christians 
zealous  in  rising  to  its  fulfilment  (11-14).  Now^ 
he  comes  back  to  the  difficulties  which  arise 
among  Christians— the  difficulties  in  actually 
living  together  as  members  of  the  same  com- 
munity—difficulties on  those  small  points  of 
religious  observance  which  seem  so  unimportant 

*  Possibly  his  mind  passes  by  a  natural  reaction  from  the 
thought  of  sensual  licentiousness  (xiii.  13)  to  that  of  unenlightened 
asceticism. 


138        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

in  the  abstract,  and  which,  in  the  actual  experience 
of  intercourse,  prove  to  be  so  terribly  important, 
and  so  easily  give  rise  to  a  '  crisis  in  the  Church.' 
How  were  the  reasonably-minded  majority  \  who 
thought  that  all  kinds  of  food  were  morally 
indifferent,  to  behave  towards  the  scrupulous  who 
would  only  eat  vegetables?  How  were  those 
Christians,  who  recognized  no  distinction  be- 
tween one  day  and  another,  to  behave  towards 
people  who  still  held  the  mind  of  the  writer  of 
Ecclesiasticus,  that  *  some  days  God  had  exalted 
and  hallowed,  and  some  he  had  made  ordinary 
days^'? 

The  problem  of  '  lawful  meats '  had  often  been 
before  the  early  Christians.  It  could  not  but 
have  been  so,  seeing  that  those  among  them, 
who  had  passed  under  Jewish  influences  had 
been  brought  under  a  system  in  which  the 
distinction  between  clean  and  unclean  meats 
had  been  rigorously  observed.  True,  our 
Lord  had  '  made  all  meats  clean  ^,'  as  He  had 
opened  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  all  believers. 
And  the  vision  which  reassured  St.  Peter  on  the 


^  It  is  implied  (xiv.  i  ;  xv.  i  and  7)  that  the  strong-minded 
brethren  were  in  the  ascendant.  It  is  them  chiefl}'  to  whom 
St,  Paul  addresses  himself. 

'    Eccliis,  xxxiii.  9.  '  Mark  vii.  19. 


Toleration  in  nnessentials         139 

latter  point,  and  forbade  him  'to  call  any  man 
common  or  unclean  V  was  expressed  in  a  form 
which  implied  that  the  same  principle  would 
apply  to  food.  But  this  fundamental  catholic 
principle,  in  its  sharp  opposition  to  Jewish 
particularism,  was  not  accepted  without  a  struggle 
at  every  point.  How  hotly,  for  a  time,  the 
struggle  raged,  we  dimly  perceive  in  the  narrative 
of  the  Acts,  and  especially  in  St.  Paul's  Epistle 
to  the  Galatians^.  But  at  the  Jerusalem  con- 
ference the  fundamental  catholic  principle  was 
unmistakably  reaffirmed.  Gentiles  were  to  be 
admitted  to  brotherhood  without  circumcision  or 
the  keeping  of  the  law.  Henceforth  then  the 
reactionaries  had  no  ground  to  stand  on.  The 
law  of  clean  and  unclean  meats  had  gone  with 
the  rest  of  the  Jewish  laws.  But  while  the 
Gentiles  won  a  complete  victory  on  the  main 
principle,  they  were  required  by  the  apostolic 
council  to  make  concessions  to  Jewish  habits  in 
eating,  such  as  could  not  affect  the  main  principle. 
They  were  to  eat  meat  killed  in  the  Jewish 
manner,  with  the  blood  thoroughly  drained  out. 
This  in  itself  would  probably  exclude  them  from 

'  Acts  X.  28. 

'''  The  matter  of  '  eating  with  the  Gentiles'  was  prominent,  ct. 


140        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

the  Gentile  shambles,  where  also  much  of  the 
meat  which  was  for  sale  would  have  been  offered 
to  idols  \  By  the  observance  of  such  a  con- 
cession, then,  Jew  and  Gentile  were  to  live 
and  eat  together  in  peace. 

The  actual  enactment  of  the  Jerusalem  con- 
ference had  a  limited  application  to  the  Gentile 
Christians  of  Antioch  and  Syria  and  Cilicia^. 
But  the  principle  was  a  vital  and  universal  one : 
to  hold  firm  the  catholic  or  '  indifferentist  * 
principle,  but  to  make  concessions  for  love's  sake 
and  to  facilitate  mutual  fellowship.  And  this 
same  principle  St.  Paul  soon  had  reason  to 
apply  again  at  Corinth.  There  the  problem  was 
not— How  could  Jew  and  Gentile  live  and  eat 
together?  but  How  far  could  Gentiles,  who  had 
become  Christians,  associate  with  Gentiles  who 
were  still  adherents  of  the  old  rehgion,  and  eat 
their  meats  ?  St.  Paul,  in  answering  this  question 
for  the  Corinthians,  strongly  asserts  the  indiffer- 
entist principle — that  meat  of  all  kinds  is  God's 
gift  and  good,  and  that  it  can  have  contracted  no 
moral  pollution  through  any  idolatrous  ceremony 
to  which  it  has  been  subjected.  No  questions, 
therefore,  are  to  be  asked  as  to  its  antecedents. 
In  this  physical  sense  meats  which  had  been 

^  I  Cor.  X.  25.  2  ^ptg  ^^,_  22_ 


Toleration  in  tmessenttals         141 

offered  to  idols  might  be  freely  eaten.  But 
when  such  eating  could  do  harm,  when,  for 
instance,  one  man  points  out  to  another  that  a 
particular  portion  of  food  has  been  part  of  a 
sacrifice,  and  it  is  plain  he  will  be  scandalized  by 
the  eating  of  it,  then  the  other  must  abstain^, 
restricting  his  own  lawful  liberty  for  charity  and 
Christian  brotherhood's  sake. 

Now  St.  Paul  had  heard  of  a  new  form  of  the 
old  difficult}^  at  Rome  I  There  was  a  Jewish 
asceticism — similar  to  what  is  found  frequently 
among  orientals,  and  was  practised  in  Europe 
among  the  Pythagoreans — which  required  men 
to  abstain  from  animal  food  altogether  and  from 
wine.  Such  was  probably  the  rule  of  the 
Essenes  in  Palestine  ^,  as  of  the  Therapeutae  in 
Egypt,  and  such  was,  according  to  a  very  early 
authority,  the  rule  of  St.  James,  the  Lord's 
brother.  Such  a  practice,  then,  had  found  favour 
among  a  minority  of  Christians  at  Rome.    And 


^  I  Cor.  viii,  and  x.  23-33. 

-  The  exact  point— abstaining  from  all  flesh  meat — is  so  different 
from  what  had  presented  itself  at  Corinth  that  there  must  be 
a  particular  reference  to  Roman  circumstances,  of  which  St.  Paul 
was  probably  informed  by  Priscilla  and  Aquila. 

^  This  seems  to  follow  from  Philo's  statement  that  they  did  not 
make  animal  sacrifices  :  and  from  Josephus'  description  of  their 
way  of  life  as  Pythagorean. 


142        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

St.  Paul  in  the  passage  we  are  now  to  study, 
in  principle  plainly  approves  of  the  indifferentist 
practice  of  the  majority.  He  knows,  and  is 
persuaded  in  the  Lord  Jesus,  that  nothing  is 
unclean  of  itself.  It  is,  he  implies,  a  weak  and 
unduly  scrupulous  conscience  which  makes  men 
^•egetarians.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  this  weaker 
brother— jthis  man  with  less  clear  perception  of 
Christian  principle  in  the  matter — must  in  no 
way  be  alienated.  He  is  to  be  made  welcome. 
There  is  no  obligation  upon  him  to  eat  meat. 
God  laid  no  such  requirement  upon  him  when 
he  became  a  Christian.  *  God  received  him.' 
The  Church  must  continue  the  like  Hberalit}^  and 
not  even  seek  to  pronounce  judgement  in  the 
matter.  In  life  and  death  each  man  is  Christ's 
servant,  and  is  responsible  to  God  for  what  he 
does  or  does  not  do.  Therefore  let  each  man 
simply  be  faithful  to  his  own  conscience  before 
God  in  this  matter,  so  that  whatever  he  eats  he 
can  'say  his  grace,'  or  'give  thanks,'  with  a 
good  conscience ;  and  let  him  be  respectfully 
tolerant  of  his  brother's  practice— the  strong  not 
despising  the  weak,  nor  the  weak  judging  and 
condemning  the  strong. 

So  far  for  liberty.     But  if,  by  using  our  liberty 
to  eat  meat,  we  are  found  to  run  a  risk  of  really 


Toleration  in  nnessentials         143 

troubling  our  brother,  or  even  (what  is  worse) 
leading  him  to  act  against  his  conscience  and 
eat  what  he  feels  he  ought  not  ^  then  we  must 
abstain.  This  becomes  matter  of  character  and 
peaceable  fellowship  and  spiritual  joy,  and  these 
are  the  really  material  things  in  the  kingdom  of 
God.  Sooner  than  do  injury  to  this  really  divine 
cause,  sooner  than  be  a  hindrance  to  his  brother, 
the  Christian  had  better  willingly  abstain  alto- 
gether from  flesh  and  wine  too. 

In  passing  St.  Paul  had  noticed  another  in- 
different matter  besides  the  eating  of  meats.  It 
was  the  observance  of  days.  St.  Paul  undoubt- 
edly considered  that  all  distinction  of  high  days 
and  common  days,  all  distinction  of  the  sabbath 
from  other  days,  had  been  in  principle  abohshed 
by  Christianity.  For  Gentile  Christians,  like 
the  Galatians,  to  be  'observing  (Jewish)  days, 
and  months,  and  seasons,  and  years  V  is  to 
show  a  miserable  disposition  to  fall  back  upon 
a  superannuated  legal  idea  of  religion— to  fall 
back  from  the  religion  of  the  Spirit  to  the 
religion  of  the  letter ;  from  the  substance  to  the 

*  Cf.  I  Cor.  viii.  lo. 

"  Gal.  iv.  10  ;  cf.  Col.  ii.  i6,  17  :  *  Let  no  man  therefore  judge  you 
in  meat,  or  in  drink,  or  in  respect  of  a  feast  day  or  a  new  moon 
or  a  sabbath  day :  which  are  a  shadow  of  the  things  to  come ;  but 
the  body  is  Christ's.' 


144        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

shadow.  For  the  Christian,  in  fundamental 
principle,  there  are  no  '  sacred  days/  for  all  days 
are  indifferently  sacred.  As  instructed  Christian 
men  could  eat  all  meats,  so  they  could  regard 
all  days  as  on  the  same  level  in  God's  sight. 
But  all  Christians  had  not  the  full  perception 
of  principle.  Among  the  Galatians,  indeed, 
the  tendency  to  observe  days  is  viewed  more 
severely  as  part  of  a  general  reactionary  ten- 
dency. But  at  Rome  it  appears  to  have 
represented  simply  the  practice  of  a  harmless, 
if  imperfectly  enlightened,  minority,  and  St.  Paul 
merely  ranks  it  among  things  indifferent,  which 
are  to  be  frankly  tolerated.  It  is  to  be  purely 
left  to  the  individual  conscience. 

With  these  preliminary  explanations— which 
in  this  case  will  serve  our  purpose  better  than 
an  analysis — we  can  read  this  section  without 
experiencing  any  great  difficulty. 

But  him  that  is  weak  in  faith  receive  ye,  yet  not  to 
doubtful  disputations  \  One  man  hath  faith  to  eat  all 
things :  but  he  that  is  weak  eateth  herbs.  Let  not  him 
that  eateth  set  at  nought  him  that  eateth  not ;  and  let  not 
him  that  eateth  not  judge  him  that  eateth  :  for  God  hath 

*  Ox  for  decisions  of  doubts,  marg.  This,  or  something  like  this, 
is  the  right  meaning  ;  cf.  Hebr.  v.  14  :'  for  decision  between  good 
and  evil.'  i  Cor.  xii.  10  :  '  discernings  of  spirits,'  i.  e.  decisions  as 
to  their  true  character. 


Toleration  in  tmessentials         145 

received  him.  Who  art  thou  that  judgest  the  servant  of 
another  ?  to  his  own  lord  he  standeth  or  falleth.  Yea,  he 
shall  be  made  to  stand ;  for  the  Lord  hath  power  to  make 
him  stand.  One  man  esteemeth  one  day  above  another : 
another  esteemeth  every  day  alike.  Let  each  man  be  fully 
assured  in  his  own  mind.  He  that  regardeth  the  day, 
regardeth  it  unto  the  Lord  :  and  he  that  eateth,  eateth 
unto  the  Lord,  for  he  giveth  God  thanks  ;  and  he  that 
eateth  not,  unto  the  Lord  he  eateth  not,  and  giveth  God 
thanks.  For  none  of  us  liveth  to  himself,  and  none  dieth 
to  himself.  For  whether  we  live,  we  live  unto  the  Lord  ; 
or  whether  we  die,  we  die  unto  the  Lord  :  whether  we 
live  therefore,  or  die,  we  are  the  Lord's.  For  to  this  end 
Christ  died,  and  lived  again,  that  he  might  be  Lord  of 
both  the  dead  and  the  living.  But  thou,  why  dost  thou 
judge  thy  brother  ?  or  thou  again,  why  dost  thou  set  at 
nought  thy  brother?  for  we  shall  all  stand  before  the 
judgement-seat  of  God.    For  it  is  written. 

As  I  live,  saith  the  Lord,  to  me  every  knee  shall  bow, 
And  every  tongue  shall  confess  to  God  ^ 
So  then  each  one  of  us  shall  give  account  of  himself  to 
God. 

Let  us  not  therefore  judge  one  another  any  more  :  but 
judge  ye  this  rather,  that  no  man  put  a  stumblingblock  in 
his  brother's  way,  or  an  occasion  of  falling.  I  know,  and 
am  persuaded  in  the  Lord  Jesus,  that  nothing  is  unclean 
of  itself:  save  that  to  him  who  accounteth  anything  to  be 
unclean,  to  him  it  is  unclean.  For  if  because  of  meat  thy 
brother  is  grieved,  thou  walkest  no  longer  in  love.  Destroy 
not  with  thy  meat  him  for  whom  Christ  died.  Let  not 
then  your  good  be  evil  spoken  of:  for  the  kingdom  of 
God  is  not  eating  and  drinking,  but  righteousness  and 
peace  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost.    For  he  that  herein 

'  From  Isa.  xlv.  23. 
II.  ^  L 


146        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

serveth  Christ  is  well-pleasing  to  God,  and  approved 
of  men.  So  then  let  us  follow  after  things  which  make 
for  peace,  and  things  whereby  we  may  edify  one  another. 
Overthrow  not  for  meat's  sake  the  work  of  God.  All 
things  indeed  are  clean ;  howbeit  it  is  evil  for  that  man 
who  eateth  with  offence.  It  is  good  not  to  eat  flesh,  nor 
to  drink  wine,  nor  to  do  anything  whereby  thy  brother 
stumbleth.  The  faith  which  thou  hast,  have  thou  to  thy- 
self before  God.  Happy  is  he  that  judgeth  not  himself  in 
that  which  he  approveth.  But  he  that  doubteth  is  con- 
demned if  he  eat,  because  he  eateth  not  of  faith  ;  and 
whatsoever  is  not  of  faith  is  sin. 

I.  According  to  St.  Paul  a  catholic  church 
ought  to  mean  a  tolerant  church,  and  a  'good 
catholic '  a  large-hearted  Christian.  If  men  of 
all  races,  with  all  sorts  of  traditional  instincts  and 
habits,  were  to  live  together  in  close  social 
cohesion  in  the  Christian  community — and  that 
was  essential — this  must  involve  much  mutual 
forbearance,  much  self-restraint,  and  deliberate 
toleration  of  differences  \  St.  Paul  plainly  not 
merely  uses,  but  loves,  the  language  of  toleration. 
'  One  man  eateth,  another  man  eateth  not,' '  One 
man  esteemeth  one  day  above  another ;  another 
esteemeth  every  day  alike.  Let  each  man  be 
fully  assured  in  his  own  mind,'  '  Receive  ye  him 
.  .  .  not  with  a  view  to  decisions  of  disputed 
questions.'     Thoroughly  in  St.  Paul's  spirit  is 

^  Cf.  Ephes.  pp.  271  f. 


Toleration  in  unessentials         147 

the  familiar  saying  '  in  necessary  things  unity : 
in  those  less  than  necessary  Hberty  :  in  all  things 
charity  \' 

In  necessary  things  unity.  To  St.  Paul  this 
principle  meant  a  clear  limit  to  toleration.  There 
is  a  common  teaching  which  lies  at  the  basis  of 
the  Church  which  must  not  be  interfered  with, 
which  is  strictly  necessar3^  '  Though  we,  or  an 
angel  from  heaven,  should  preach  unto  you  any 
gospel  other  than  that  which  we  preached  unto 
3^ou,  let  him  be  anathema^.'  '  How  say  some 
among  you  that  there  is  no  resurrection  of  the 
dead  ?  But  if  there  is  no  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  neither  hath  Christ  been  raised  :  and  if 
Christ  hath  not  been  raised,  then  is  our  preach- 
ing vain,  your  faith  also  is  vain  •'!  Plainl}^  there 
is  an  essential  fundamental  creed  which  must  not 
be  trifled  with.  The  same  is  true  about  the 
moral  law.  In  respect  of  that  also  the  Chris- 
tian body  must  exercise  upon  its  members  the 
severity  of  judgement*,  that  '  he  that  hath  done  ' 
the  evil  deed  '  might  be  taken  away  from  among 
them,'  or  excommunicated.  Once  more,  we 
cannot  conceive  St.  Paul  making  the  necessity 
of  visible  unity  a  secondary  consideration  ^^  nor 

^  See  app.  note  H,  p.  239.  -  Gal.  i.  8. 

"  I  Cor.  XV.  12,  13.  ^  1  Cor.  v.  '•'  Cf.  Ephes.  p.  126. 

L  2  • 


348        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

the  recognition  of  the  authority  of  the  apostohc 
ministry  which  is  to  be  the  centre  of  unity,  nor 
the  sacraments,  which  again  are  not  only  means 
of  divine  grace  to  the  individual  but  instruments 
and  bonds  of  unity.  Nor  again  would  St.  Paul 
undervalue  the  spirit  of  obedience  to  the  rules 
of  the  Church.  He  hates  the  spirit  of  heresy  or 
separatism.  *  We  have  no  such  custom,'  he 
would  say  to  the  recalcitrant,  '  neither  the 
churches  of  God^'  Once  again,  St.  Paul  is 
prepared  to  let  everything  turn  on  even  a  small 
and  unessential  point,  if  that  point  has  become 
the  symbol  of  a  vital  principle  for  good  or  evil. 
Thus,  in  itself,  'circumcision  was  nothing,'  but 
when  among  the  Galatians  the  practice  of  it 
came  to  mean  a  practical  Judaizing — a  practi- 
cal abandonment  of  the  fundamental  Christian 
principle — then  '  Behold,  I  Paul  say  unto  you, 
that,  if  ye  receive  circumcision,  Christ  will  profit 
you  nothing^.' 

Here,  then,  are  St.  Paul's  essentials,  as  to 
which  he  is  intolerant — a  fundamental  tradi- 
tion of  faith  and  morals :  the  maintenance  of  the 
unity  of  the  body  by  means  of  the  apostolic 
stewardship,  and  through  the '  one  baptism,'  and 
the  'one  loaf :  and  the  spirit  of  due  subordina- 

*  I  Cor.  xi.  16.  Gal.  v.  2. 


Toleration  in  unessentials         149 

tion  which  is  necessary  to  corporate  life.  But 
in  a  spirit  very  unHke  what  has  at  times  become 
prevalent  in  the  Church,  he  would  clearly 
minimize  the  action  of  authority,  and  leave  large 
room  for  the  free  movement  of  conscience  in 
Christians.  '  Let  us  therefore,  as  many  as  be 
perfect,  be  thus  minded :  and  if  in  anything 
ye  are  otherwise  minded,  even  this  shall  God 
reveal  unto  you :  only,  whereunto  we  have 
already  attained,  by  that  same  rule  let  us  walk  \' 
Surely  it  is  not  very  difficult  to  apply  this 
spirit  of  St.  Paul  to  our  own  time,  in  view  of 
those  subordinate  points  which  excite  such  deep 
animosities.  Men  are  by  fundamental  disposi- 
tion, in  great  measure,  rituahst  or  puritan,  eccle- 
siastically or  individually  minded,  disciplinarian 
or  mystical.  And  the  Church  should  lay  on 
all  a  certain  common  law  of  doctrine  and 
morals  and  worship,  sufficient  to  keep  them  all 
together  in  one  body.  But,  consistently  with 
the  coherence  of  the  body,  why  should  there  not 
be  both  an  ornate  and  a  bare  ritual  of  worship, 
both  societies  of  strict  observance  and  individual 
freedom,  and  a  wide  field  of  open  questions  in 
which  we  do  not  even  expect  '  decisions  of 
doubts  '  ?     Instead  of  my  own  reflections  on  this 

'  Phil.  iii.  15,  16. 


150        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

subject  I  will  ask  my  readers'  attention  to  the 
following  extracts  from  a  suggestive  book  ^ 

'At  all  times  there  are  those  to  whom  what 
we  may  call  the  minor  symbolism  of  ritual  is  far 
from  being  as  helpful  as  it  is  to  others.  There 
is  the  greatest  diversity  here.  Modes  of  worship, 
which  repel  one  man  as  bleak  and  bare,  attract 
another  by  their  very  simplicity.  The  diversity 
is  so  natural  and  so  obvious  that  it  calls  for 
neither  apology  nor  explanation ;  3^et  it  is  easily 
strained  into  a  cause  of  disruption.' 

'St.  Paul  is  speaking  of  strong  brethren  and 
of  weak;  of  those  who  need  earthly  guides 
and  of  those  w^ho  do  not ;  of  those  who  attach 
high  value  to  rules  and  forms  and  helps ;  and 
of  those  for  whom  ordinances  have  but  little 
significance ;   of  mystics  and  discipHnarians.' 

'Again,  do  we  not  still  want  a  scientific 
theology?  I  mean  a  theology  which  should 
do  what  any  scientific  treatise  does.  It  should 
lay  down  clearly  and  plainly  the  essential  con- 
ditions of  unit}^,  and  as  regards  the  unessential 
should  content  itself  with  saying,  "  Here  men 
differ ;  one  thinks  thus,  another  thus."  .  .  .  Ask 
yourself,  What  is  it  that  will  carry  me,  being 

•  Unity  in  Diversity,  by  Charles  Bigg,  D.D.  (Longmans,  1899;, 
pp.  84,  85.  95. 


Toleration  in  nnessentials         151 

what  I  am,  to  heaven?  What  is  it  will  carry 
my  brother  here,  who  is  so  unlike  me,  to 
heaven?  What  is  it  that  will  carry  us  both 
to  heaven  ?  There  you  will  find  the  essential.' 
St.  Paul,  we  observe,  lays  great  stress  upon 
honesty  of  conscience.  He  wishes  men,  even 
in  small  matters,  seriously  to  cultivate  a  con- 
science of  what  is  right,  as  men  should  do  who 
even  in  small  things  expect  a  divine  judgement ; 
and  seriously  also  to  cultivate  the  faculty  of  not 
interfering  with  their  brother's  conscience. 
C  Hast  thou  faith  ?  Have  it  to  thyself.'  Do  not 
parade  your  superior  enlightenment.)  He  is 
greatly  afraid  of  people  leading  others,  or  being 
led  for  mere  agreement's  sake,  to  do  what  their 
own  conscience  does  not  justify.  And  to  do 
even  a  good  thing  because  another  does  it 
whom  we  want  to  be  like,  without  ourselves 
feeling  sure  it  is  good,  or  with  a  doubtful  con- 
science ^  this,  St.  Paul  says,  is  sin.  This 
warning  we  really  need  to  lay  to  heart  in  our 
age,  when  fashion  is  such  a  very  strong  force  in 
religion.  This  individual  follows  that  individual 
and  '  supposes  it  must  be  all  right,  as  every  one 
seems  to  do  it ' ;  this  congregation  follows  that 

^  '  Whatever  is  not  of  faith  is  sin — tliat  is  whatever  is  against 
conscience.'     Aquinas,  quoted  in  S.  and  //.  in  loc. 


152        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

congregation  in  adopting  a  popular  practice, 
without  its  real  basis  and  justification  being  con- 
sidered. But  fashion  and  the  influence  of  mem- 
bers is  a  great  danger  in  religion.  *  Let  every 
man  be  fully  assured  in  his  own  mind.'  '  What- 
ever is  notof  faith  is  sin  ^' 

2.  Plainly,  when  St.  Paul  wrote  his  epistles, 
there  was  no  observance  of  a  .Sabbath  obligatory 
upon  Christians^.  But  was  there  none  of  Sun- 
day ?  '  The  first  day  of  the  week '  was  already 
*  the  Lord's  day,'  so  far  as  that  Christians  who 
could  not  meet  to  '  break  the  bread '  every 
day,  met  on  that  day  specially  to  commemorate 
the  death  of  their  risen  Lord  till  He  should 
come  again '^  It  was  already  sufficientty  dis- 
tinctive for  St.  Paul  to  name  it  as  the  appro- 
priate day  for  laying  by  alms  for  the  poor*. 
But  these  special  observances  of  it  were  not 
obligatory.  Christians,  when  they  could  meet 
every  da}^,  might  make  their  eucharist  every 
da}^  No  such  observance  of  Sunday  was  yet 
enjoined   as  was   incompatible  with   regarding 

*  Cf.  xii.  6  :  '  Let  us  prophesy  according  to  the  proportion  of 
our  faith.' 

^  Col.  ii.  16 :  '  Let  no  man  judge  you  in  respect  of  a  sabbath 
day.' 

^  This  is  probably  implied  in  Acts  xx.  7. 

*  1  Cor.  xvi.  2. 


Toleration  in  unessentials         153 

all  days  of  the  week  alike.  Nothing  less  than 
this  can  satisfy  St.  Paul's  words.  In  principle, 
as  Bishop  Lightfoot  said\  'the  kingdom  of  Christ 
has  no  sacred  days  or  seasons,  because  every 
time  alike  is  holy.' 

Yet  the  bishop  adds,  'appointed  da3'S  are 
indispensable  to  her  efficienc3^'  This  was  soon 
found  to  be  the  case.  Probabl}^  before  the  end  of 
the  first  century,  the  Didache  mentions  not  only 
the  observ^ance  of  Sunday  by  the  eucharistic 
service,  but  the  observance  also  of  the  Wednes- 
day and  Friday  fasts.  Clement,  about  the  same 
date,  strongly  emphasizes  the  principle  of  order 
in  place  and  time,  as  still  belonging  to  Christian 
worship.  '  They,  therefore,  that  make  their  offer- 
ing at  the  appointed  seasons  are  acceptable  and 
blessed.'  The  Canons  of  Hippol3tus  show  that 
by  the  end  of  the  second  century  there  must 
have  been  a  great  development  of  ecclesiastical 
regulations,   so    far    restraining   the    individual 

^  Pht'lippiaus,  on  'the  Christian  Ministry,'  p.  i8i.  The  lan- 
guage in  the  immediate  context  I  cannot  make  my  own.  But 
the  statement  quoted  is  surely  true.  And  to  this  day  I  suppose, 
for  those  living  in  religious  communities  and  similar  institu- 
tions, there  is  very  little  practical  difference  between  Sundays 
and  week-days.  This  almost  complete  absence  of  distinction, 
however,  must  always  come  about,  if  it  is  to  be  legitimate,  by 
raising  the  week-days  to  the  spiritual  level  of  the  Sundays,  and 
not  by  the  opposite  process. 


154        The  Eptstle  to  the  Romans 

liberty  of  the  earliest  days,  and  that,  as  far  as  we 
know,  without  protest  or  sense  of  alarm.  Nor 
need  St.  Paul  have  been  in  opposition  to  such 
church  rules.  The  spirit  of  regulation  is  strong 
in  him  \  On  the  other  hand,  there  is  no  doubt 
that  the  Church  has  not  generally,  one  might 
say  has  hardly  ever,  been  conscious,  as  St.  Paul 
was,  of  the  danger  of  religious  regulations  as 
such.  It  is  so  much  easier  to  keep  certain  rules 
than  to  acquire  and  maintain  a  certain  mind  and 
spirit  and  principle  of  action.  In  the  history  of 
the  Church  St.  Paul,  we  feel,  would  very  often 
have  been  sa3ang,  '  I  am  afraid  of  you :  the 
rules  are  good  in  themselves,  but  there  are 
dangers  attaching  to  all  rules  of  which  you 
seem  to  be  quite  unconscious.  There  is  a  lower 
sort  of  religion  of  forms  and  observances,  and 
you  may  fall  back  into  it  as  easily  as  the 
Galatians.' 

But  after  all,  rules  for  living  religiously,  pri- 
vate or  ecclesiastical,  are,  we  all  know,  invaluable, 
and  practically  necessary.  A  man  or  a  church 
that  should  attempt  to  dispense  with  them 
would  come  to  disaster.  It  is  ver}'  difficult  to 
fathom  the  depth  of  the  mischief  that  has  come 

*  Especially  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles:  but  also  in  the  epistles  to 
the  Thessaloiiians  and  Corinthians. 


Toleration  in  unessentials         155 

about  in  the  corporate  social  life  of  the  Church 
of  England,  through  the  neglect  of  the  surely 
moderate  amount  of  regulation  which  was  pro- 
vided for  us  by  the  Prayer  Book  in  the  way  of 
festival  and  fast  days  and  of  daily  service.  To 
keep  a  few  simple,  intelligible,  religious  rules  all 
together  gives  almost  as  much  as  a  common 
creed  the  feeling  of  social  coherence.  Even  the 
extremest  Paulinist  need  have  no  fear  so  long- 
as  the  ecclesiastical  regulations  do  not  reach  the 
point  of  becoming  a  burden— so  long  as  no  one 
could  be  in  danger  of  priding  himself  on  '  acquir- 
ing merit'  by  their  mere  observance;  and  so 
long  also  as  the  principle  is  kept  clearly  in  view 
that  '  the  rules  were  made  for  man  and  not  man 
for  the  rules.'  But  I  do  not  think  there  can  be 
any  reasonable  doubt  that  St.  Paul  would  re- 
pudiate the  idea  that  any  rules  of  worship  and 
observance,  other  than  those  which  are  neces- 
sarily involved  in  the  administration  of  the  sacra- 
ments, can  obtain  by  prescription  a  right  to 
permanence.  '  They  may  be  changed  according 
to  the  diversities  of  countries,  times,  and  men's 
manners.'  They  were  made  for  man ;  and  the 
Church  or  the  churches— with  due  regard  to 
mutual  fellowship—can  modify  or  abolish 
them. 


156        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

3.  '  Overthrow  not  for  meat's  sake  the  work 
of  God.'  '  It  is  good  not  to  eat  flesh  nor  to 
drink  wine,  nor  to  do  anything  whereby  thy 
brother  stumbleth.'  *  Wherefore,  if  meat  maketh 
m}^  brother  to  stumble,  I  will  eat  no  flesh  for 
evermore,  that  I  make  not  my  brother  to 
stumbled'  Here  is  the  right  principle  of 'total 
abstinence '  which  does  not  deny  the  legitimate 
use  of  what  it  3/et  permanently  abandons  for 
love's  sake.  St.  Paul  would  have  Timothy  use 
a  little  wine  when  it  was  for  his  health's  sake, 
but  when  health  was  not  in  question,  he  would 
have  all  men  ask,  not  how  much  liberty  in  this 
or  that  is  lawful  for  them,  but  how  they  can 
avoid  causing  offence — how  they  can  do  most 
good.  This  principle  admits  of  application  in 
many  directions.  For  instance,  it  may  be  very 
hard  to  determine  why  certain  minor  forms  of 
gambling  are  wrong,  or  whether  they  are  posi- 
tively wrong.  But  St.  Paul  would  have  the 
other  question  asked — Can  it  be  denied  that 
the  best  way  to  avoid  leading  my  brother  into 
one  of  the  most  common  dangers  of  our  time, 
is  to  keep  altogether  free  from  a  habit  which 
in  any  case  can  do  no  good  to  body  or 
mind  ? 

^  I  Cor.  viii.  13. 


Toleration  in  unessentials         157 

4.  Here,  as  in  x.  7,  St.  Paul  touches  upon  the 
descent  into  Hades,  and  indicates  the  purpose  of 
it.  '  For  this  end  Christ  died,  that  He  might  be 
Lord  of  the  dead.'  It  might  have  been  imagined 
that  the  dim  realms  of  the  dead  were  outside  the 
jurisdiction  of  Christ— that  the  dead  have  no 
king — that  the  kingdom  of  redemption  does  not 
include  them.  To  obviate  such  an  idea,  to  show 
the  universality  of  His  realm,  Christ  went  down 
among  the  dead. 

5.  In  many  places  of  the  New  Testament 
there  is  mention  of  the  thanksgiving  before 
food — the  Christian's  'saying  grace.'  Whether 
he  eat  flesh  or  vegetables  he  'giveth  God  thanks \' 
And  the  word  used  is  the  word  which,  in  its 
substantive  form,  is  '  eucharist.'  And  indeed 
there  is  meaning  in  this.  The  thankful  recep- 
tion by  the  Christian  of  the  ordinary  bread  of 
his  daily  life  as  coming  from  God,  touched  his 
common  meals  with  something  of  the  glory  of 
divine  communion  ;  and  the  eucharist  in  its  turn 

*  Cf.  I  Cor.  X.  30  :  '  Why  am  I  evil  spoken  of  for  that  for  which 
I  give  thanks.'  i  Tim.  iv.  3,  4 :  '  Meats,  which  God  created  to 
be  received  with  thanksgiving.  .  .  .  For  every  creature  of  God  is 
good  ...  if  it  be  received  with  thanksgiving :  for  it  is  sanctified 
through  the  word  of  God  and  prayer.  Cf.  Acts  xxvii.  35  :  '  And 
when  he  had  taken  bread,  he  gave  thanks  to  God  in  the  presence 
of  all :  and  he  brake  it,  and  began  to  eat.* 


158        Tlie  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

is  the  common  blessing  and  breaking  of  the 
bread,  raised  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  a  higher 
power  and  consecrated  to  become  the  vehicle  of 
the  bread  of  life\ 

^  Matt.  xxvi.  26  ;  cf.  Luke  xxiv.  30. 


Unselfish  forbearance  159 


DIVISION  V.  §  7.     Chapter  XV.  1-13. 

Unselfish  forbearance  and  inclusiveness. 

It  was  essential,  as  has  been  said,  that  men 
whose  prejudices  and  instincts  were  different 
should  live  in  the  same  church  and  eat  at  the 
same  love  feast.  This  would  require  a  large- 
hearted  and  unselfish  self-control.  Formerly,  as 
in  Syria  and  Palestine,  it  was  the  Jews  who 
occupied  the  position  of  vantage  in  the  Christian 
communities,  and  were  not  disposed  to  tolerate 
the  ways  of  the  Gentiles.  Now  the  tables  are 
turned,  and  the  Gentiles  are  in  the  majorit3\ 
The  danger  is  now  that  those  whose  instincts 
are  Gentile  should  bear  hardly  upon  the  minority 
whose  prejudices  are  more  or  less  Jewish.  Such 
St.  Paul  anticipates,  or  knows  from  Priscilla 
and  Aquila,  will  be  the  danger  among  the  Roman 
Christians.  Formerly  Judaic  narrowness  had 
been  a  formidable  danger.  It  had  developed 
a  most  perilous  heresy,  and  St.  Paul  had  dealt 
with  it  as  a  deadly  poison.    Now  what  remained 


i6o        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

of  Jewish  feeling  was  a  weakness  to  be  generously 
borne  with.  It  affords  St.  Paul  an  opportunity 
of  falling  back  on  the  general  principle,  that  the 
measure  of  Christian  strength  and  full-grown 
manhood  is  the  readiness  to  bear  the  weaknesses 
of  others. 

To  be  told  he  must  not  use  his  normal  liberty, 
must  not  eat  his  usual  meal  or  drink  his  usual 
cup  of  wine,  because  it  might  scandalize  some 
Christian  with  the  ascetic  prejudices  of  an 
Essene,  or  even  induce  him  to  do  the  same 
against  his  own  conscience — to  be  told  this 
was  annoying  to  a  man  who  held  the  '  strong ' 
Christian  conviction  that  all  kinds  of  food  were 
indifferently  allowable.  The  weak  scruple  of 
his  brother  Christian  had  become  an  annoying 
burden  of  self-denial  and  self-restraint  laid  on 
himself  But  this,  St.  Paul  says,  is  how 
Christian  strength— whether  it  be  the  moral 
strength  of  clear  convictions,  or  any  other  sort 
of  faculty  ^— must  show  itself,  in  readiness  to 
suffer  on  account  of  other  people's  deficiencies, 
in  not  resenting  the  restraints  they  lay  on  us,  in 
not  expecting  to  do   as  we  please,  but  being 

*  We  are  all  '  strong '  in  some  respect,  Origen  remarks,  so  that 
'  ye  that  are  strong  bear  the  infirmities  of  the  weak'  comes  to  be 
as  broad  a  precept  as  '  bear  ye  one  another's  burdens.' 


Unselfish  forbearance  i6i 

ready  to  accommodate  ourselves  to  our  neigh- 
bour's tastes  where  it  is  for  his  good.  That 
is  what  our  great  example  did.  Plainly  His 
whole  human  life  was  putting  Himself  under 
the  restraints  which  our  weaknesses  and  narrow- 
nesses and  slownesses  laid  on  Him.  The 
righteous  man  in  the  psalm  complains  that  he 
has  to  bear  all  the  reproaches  of  God  which 
impatient  and  rebellious  Israelites  might  utter; 
and  that  is  the  picture  of  Christ  bearing  our 
infirmities.  (The  reproaches  which  fell  on  Him 
were  for  the  very  largeness  of  His  love ;  '  because 
He  received  sinners,'  and  because  He  received 
them  on  the  Sabbaths  as  well  as  on  other  days. 
They  were  reproaches  of  God,  like  Jonah's, 
because  He  was  too  forbearing,  too  generous.) 

Then  St.  Paul  pauses  a  moment  to  justify  his 
use  of  the  Psalms.  These  ancient  scriptures  did 
not  fulfil  their  purpose  in  their  own  time,  or 
for  the  old  covenant.  God  intended  them  for 
Christians.  Their  teaching  is  what  they  need. 
The  burdens  of  life  are  so  many,  its  requirements 
upon  their  patience  so  constant,  that  they  find  it 
hard  to  maintain  their  hope.  Yet  what  is  the 
Old  Testament  so  full  of?  Lessons  of  endurance 
and  words  of  encouragement.  The  encourage- 
ment and  endurance  then,  which  they  gain  from 

II.  M 


i62        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

the  Old  Testament,  are  to  help  them  to  maintain 
Christian  hope.  They  must  not  lose  heart.  The 
end  is  a  great  one :  it  is  the  maintenance  of 
a  united  spirit  in  the  Church,  such  as  Christ  can 
approve,  such  as  can  express  itself  in  a  really 
unanimous  adoration  of  Him  whom  Christ  recog- 
nized as  His  God  and  Father.  May  the  God 
who  inspires  endurance  and  encouragement, 
grant  them  not  to  fail  in  this  great  end ! 

Here  is  the  central  requirement,  then,  which 
a  catholic  church  lays  on  them.  It  is  to  be 
unselfishly  inclusive,  to  welcome  into  fellowship 
people  who  are  not  naturally  to  their  taste.  Our 
Lord  did  not  scrutinize  us  men,  but  received  us, 
of  whatever  sort  we  were,  that  God  might  be 
glorified  in  human  brotherhood.  He  vindicated 
the  truth  of  God  by  fulfilling  the  covenant 
of  circumcision :  first,  to  confirm  the  promises 
given  to  the  fathers  of  Israel  ^ ;  and,  secondly, 
to  enlarge  the  compass  of  Israel,  so  that  the 
Gentiles  too  might  share  its  blessings,  out  of 
God's  pure  mercy  apart  from  any  promises. 
And  this  also— the  fellowship  of  Jew  and  Gen- 
tile—was matter  of  ancient  prediction  by  psalmist 

*  Cf.  Gal.  iv.  4, 5  :  '  Christ,  born  of  a  woman,  born  under  the  law, 
that  he  might  redeem  them  which  were  under  the  law,  that  we 
(Jews  and  Gentiles)  might  receive  the  adoption  of  sons.' 


Unselfish  forbearance  163 

and  prophet.  The  Roman  Christians  must  not 
therefore  let  themselves  be  discouraged  because 
they  have  a  difficult  task  to  fulfil.  And  the 
apostle  prays  that  God,  the  inspirer  of  hope,  may 
fill  them  with  such  a  rich  sense  of  the  blessings 
of  believing  in  Him,  that  His  Spirit,  dwelling 
in  them,  may  make  hope  to  abound  in  their 
hearts. 


Now  we  that  are  strong  ought  to  bear  the  infirmities 
of  the  weak,  and  not  to  please  ourseh^es.  Let  each  one 
of  us  please  his  neighbour  for  that  which  is  good,  unto 
edifying.  For  Christ  also  pleased  not  himself ;  but,  as  it 
is  written.  The  reproaches  of  them  that  reproached  thee 
fell  upon  me.  For  whatsoever  things  were  written  afore- 
time were  written  for  our  learning,  that  through  patience 
and  through  comfort  of  the  scriptures  we  might  have  hope. 
Now  the  God  of  patience  and  of  comfort  grant  you  to  be 
of  the  same  mind  one  with  another  according  to  Christ 
Jesus:  that  with  one  accord  ye  may  with  one  mouth  glorify 
the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Wherefore 
receive  ye  one  another,  even  as  Christ  also  received  you, 
to  the  glory  of  God.  For  I  say  that  Christ  hath  been  made 
a  minister  of  the  circumcision  for  the  truth  of  God,  that 
he  might  confirm  the  promises  ^/w«  unto  the  fathers,  and 
that  the  Gentiles  might  glorify  God  for  his  mercy ;  as  it  is 
written, 

Therefore  wall  I  give  praise  unto  thee  among  the 
Gentiles, 

And  sing  unto  thy  name. 
And  again  he  saith, 

Rejoice,  ye  Gentiles,  with  his  people. 
M  2 


164        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

And  again, 

Praise  the  Lord,  all  ye  Gentiles ; 

And  let  all  the  peoples  praise  him. 
And  again,  Isaiah  saith, 

There  shall  be  the  root  of  Jesse, 

And  he  that  ariseth  to  rule  over  the  Gentiles  ; 

On  him  shall  the  Gentiles  hope. 
Now  the  God  of  hope  fill  you  with  all  joy  and  peace  in 
believing,  that  ye  may  abound  in  hope,  in  the  power  of 
the  Holy  Ghost. 


I.  The  connexion  of  thought  in  this  passage 
is  undoubtedly  somewhat  obscure.  But  we 
know  to-day,  as  well  as  ever,  how  difficult  it 
is  to  bear  with  what  is  disagreeable  to  us  in 
others,  with  what  seem  to  us  their  deficiencies, 
without  breaking  real  Christian  brotherhood  and 
co-operation.  And  we  know  also  that  where  we 
are  possessed  by  an  enthusiasm  for  brother- 
hood such  as  inspired  the  early  Christians,  the 
divisions  which  small  differences  tend  to  produce 
are  peculiarly  discouraging,  because  they  suggest 
that  real  brotherhood  is  impossible  where  men 
are  so  differently  constituted.  We  ought  not, 
therefore,  to  be  at  a  loss  to  see  why  St.  Paul 
should  pass  so  easily  from  speaking  of  divisions 
among  Christians  to  speak  of  the  grounds  of 
patience  and  encouragement  and  hope.  The 
Christian  hope  is — in  substantial  part— the  hope 


Unselfish  forbearance  165 

of  a  really  catholic  church— a  real  brotherhood 
among  people  of  different  races,  classes,  tastes, 
and  habits ;  and  it  is  this  great  hope  which,  even 
in  St.  Paul's  day,  was  continually  suffering  dis- 
couragement and  continually  needed  reinforcing. 
And  the  reinforcement  must  be  '  supernatural.' 
It  is  the  divine  love  of  the  Spirit  possessing  us 
which  alone  can  give  it  vigour.  When  we  are 
full  of  the  divine  consolation,  then  it  is  that  we 
are  least  inclined  to  be  critical,  and  most  disposed 
'to  receive  one  another,  as  Christ  also  received 
us,  to  the  glory  of  God.'  For  this  is  the  thought 
we  are  to  have  constantly  in  view,  when  we  find 
people  'aggravating'— Christ  received  us,  and 
made  the  best  of  those  whom  '  God  gave  him,'  in 
spite  of  the  infinite  annoyances  which  we  men, 
even  the  apostles,  caused  Him;  He  dealt  with 
us  with  infinite  patience  ;  He  made  us  welcome  ; 
He  'received  us.' 

In  fact,  the  reason  why  the  connexion  of 
thought  in  this  passage  seems  obscure  to  us, 
is  probably  in  part  that  we  have  ceased  to  think 
of  the  real  fellowship  of  the  naturally  unlike— 
fellowship  in  all  that  makes  up  human  life— as 
a  necessary  part  of  the  Christian  religion.  But 
to  St.  Paul  there  was  no  Christianity  without  the 
reality  of  catholic  brotherhood. 


i66        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

2.  St.  Paul  here,  as  in  writing  to  the  Corin- 
thians ^  shows  himself  specially  anxious  that 
Gentile  Christians  should  not  think  they  could 
make  light  of  the  Old  Testament,  or  imagine 
that  '  Christ  was  the  end  of  the  law '  in  any 
such  sense  as  would  make  the  books  of  the  old 
covenant  superfluous  under  the  new.  Their 
value,  he  insists,  remains  permanent.  When 
he  is  writing  to  the  Corinthians,  he  finds  it  in 
the  moral  warnings— the  warnings  of  divine 
judgement  upon  the  chosen  people — of  which 
the  history  is  full.  In  this  epistle  he  is  thinking 
chiefly  of  the  lessons  of  *  endurance '  and  divine 
'  encouragements,'  which  histories  and  prophets 
provide.  In  his  epistle  to  Timothy^  he  thinks 
of  the  books  as  instruments  by  the  use  of  which 
the  minister  or  representative  of  God  may 
become  fully  educated  and  equipped  for  all  the 
purposes  of  moral  supervision  and  discipline. 
They  can  thus  educate  and  equip  him,  St.  Paul 

'  1  Cor.  X.  IT  :  'These  things  happened  unto  them  (the  Jews 
in  the  Wilderness)  by  way  of  example  ;  and  they  were  written  for 
our  admonition,  upon  whom  the  ends  of  the  ages  are  come.' 

^  2  Tim.  iii.  15-17.  'Sacred  writings  which  are  able  to  make 
thee  wise  unto  salvation  through  faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus. 
Every  scripture  inspired  by  God  is  also  profitable  for  teaching, 
for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction  which  is  in  righteous- 
ness :  that  the  man  of  God  may  be  complete,  furnished  completely 
unto  ever}'  good  work.' 


Unselfish  forbearance  167 

teaches,  because  they  were  originally  written 
under  the  influence  of  a  divine  inspiration ;  but 
it  is  only  when  faith  has  finally  attained  its  true 
object  in  Jesus  Christ  that  their  real  meaning 
becomes  apparent.  And  this  last  principle  is 
imphed  in  almost  all  his  use  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. 

It  is  a  comfort  to  perceive  that  none  of  the 
elements  of  permanent  value,  which  St.  Paul 
discerns  in  the  Old  Testament,  are  the  least 
likely  to  be  affected  by  reasonable  criticism  of 
its  documents.  Its  history,  critically  read,  does 
not  become  less  truly  pregnant  with  moral 
warnings  or  lessons  of  endurance.  The  en- 
couragements of  the  prophets  are  in  no  respect 
reduced  in  force  when  they  are  brought  into 
right  relation  to  their  own  times.  The  whole 
library  of  books  is,  at  least,  as  capable  of  edu- 
cating and  equipping  the  minister  of  Christ  as 
ever.  Their  inspiration  is  still  obvious,  when 
it  is  interpreted  candidl}^  in  view  of  all  the  facts. 
And  still  they  can  only  be  rightly  regarded  when 
they  are  looked  upon  as  various  elements  in  a 
progress  which  has  Christ  for  its  goal. 

In  his  use  of  particular  passages  in  the 
Old  Testament  St.  Paul  here  shows  himself  as 
free  as  ever,  but  with  the  same   fundamental 


i68        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

adherence  to  the  true  tendency  of  the  Old 
Testament  as  a  whole.  In  quoting  Ps.  Ixix.  9 
(ver.  3)  he  is  seeing  in  the  afflicted  righteous 
man  a  type  of  Christ.  This  psalm  is  constantly 
cited  in  the  New  Testament  with  the  same 
reference  \  It  has  been  supposed  ^  that  St.  Paul 
here  adopts  a  cry  addressed  to  God  by  the 
righteous  sufferer  in  the  psalm,  and  represents 
it  as  addressed  by  Christ  to  his  brother  man. 
'  The  reproaches  aimed  at  thee,  my  despised 
brother,  have  fallen  upon  me.'  But,  as  I  have 
tried  to  show  in  the  analysis  above,  this  sup- 
position is  not  needed.  Christ  is  represented 
appeaUng  to  God  for  succour,  because  He 
utterly  refuses  to  take  the  line  of  self-pleasing ; 
but  bears  all  that  men's  impatience  of  God 
lays  upon  Him— all  their  'wild  and  weak  com- 
plaining.' And  it  is  suggestive  to  remember, 
with  Origen,  that  it  was  Christ's  'receiving  of 
sinners  and  eating  with  them,'  receiving  them 
on  the  Sabbath  as  well  as  other  days,  that 
chiefly  brought  on  Him  the  reproaches  of  men. 
This  was  probably  in  St.  Paul's  mind. 

In  Ps.  xviii.  49  (quoted  ver.  9)  the  victorious 

^  Cf.  above,  xi.  9  ;  in  the  Gospels,  Matt,  xxvii.  34  ;  John  ii.  17  ; 
xix.  28  ;  also  Acts  i.  20. 
^  See  5.  and  H.  in  loc. 


Unselfish  forbearance  169 

king  declares  that  he  will  praise  God  for  his 
victory  'among  the  nations.'  St.  Paul  applies 
this  to  Christ,  whose  victory  among  the  nations 
means  their  redemption— their  becoming  His 
people. 

In  Deut.  xxxii.  43  (ver.  10)  'the  nations  are 
invited  to  congratulate  Israel  on  possessing 
a  God  like  Jehovah,  who  will  effectually  take 
up  His  people's  cause.  Such  an  invitation 
addressed  to  the  nations  (cf.  Isa.  xlii.  10-12; 
Ps.  xlvii.  2,  Ixvii.  1-7,  &c.)  involves  implicitly 
the  prophetic  truth  that  God's  dealings  with 
Israel  have  indirectly  an  interest  and  importance 
for  the  world  at  large  \'  This  is  still  more  plainly 
implied  in  Ps.  cxvii.  i  (ver.  11). 

Isa.  xi.  10  (ver.  12)  is  quoted  from  the  Greek 
Bible,  which  is  paraphrastic;  but  the  Hebrew 
also  asserts  that  the  messianic  king  of  David's 
line  is  to  be  a  '  signal  to  the  nations,'  and  that 
they  are  to  'resort  to  him'  as  to  an  oracle  or 
place  of  refuge  ^. 

^  Driver,  in  loc.  "^  Cheyne,  in  he. 


170        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


DIVISION  VI.    Chapters  XV.  14— XVI.  27. 

Conclusion. 

The  long  letter  is  almost  ended.  St.  Paul  has 
developed  the  meaning  of  the  revelation  of 
the  divine  righteousness.  He  has  vindicated 
the  ways  of  God  to  the  Jews.  He  has  drawn 
out  sufficientl}'  the  moral  conclusions  from  God's 
mercy  to  mankind.  Now  he  has  onl}^  to  secure 
again  his  good  terms  with  the  Roman  Chris- 
tians—which he  does  with  the  same  tact  and 
the  same  anxiety  as  at  the  beginning^,— to 
explain  his  movements,  to  send  his  greetings  to 
individuals,  and  to  bid  farewell. 

^  Vol.  i.  p.  53. 


Excuses,  hopes,  and  fears         171 


DIVISION  VI.  §  I.     Chapter  XV.  14-33. 

His  excuse  for  writing  and  his  hope  of  coming. 

St.  Paul  is  very  anxious  not  to  be  understood 
as  if,  while  giving  the  Christians  at  Rome  these 
exhortations  which  we  have  just  been  reading, 
he  stood  in  any  doubt  himself  of  their  goodness 
of  heart  and  full  grasp  of  Christian  principles,  or 
of  their  fitness  to  admonish  one  another.  He 
has  only  been  bold  to  put  them  in  mind  of  what 
they  already  knew,  because  of  the  priestly 
commission  on  behalf  of  his  Lord  tow^ards  all 
the  Gentiles,  which  the  divine  grace  has  bestowed 
upon  him  as  apostle  of  the  Gentiles.  The 
gospel  entrusted  to  him  requires  him  as  a  priest 
to  prepare  and  offer  sacrifice ;  and  the  sacrifice 
which  he  is  to  prepare,  which  the  consecration 
of  the  indwelling  Spirit  alone  can  make  accept- 
able, is  that  of  the  whole  Gentile  world.  The 
extent  to  which  this  great  charge  laid  upon  him 
has  been  fulfilled,  gives  him  good  reason  for 


172        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

boasting  as  he  stands  before  God — not  in 
himself,  but  in  Christ  Jesus.  His  work  has 
been  a  pioneer's  work.  He  has  made  it  his 
ambition  purely  to  lay  foundations.  Taking 
words  of  Isaiah^  for  his  motto,  he  had  resolved 
to  go  nowhere  where  any  other  had  been  before 
him  to  make  Christ  known.  But  in  that  free 
and  open  area  of  a  yet  unevangelized  world, 
Christ  had  worked  through  him  to  bring  the 
Gentiles  to  His  obedience,  and  had  accompanied 
his  preaching  with  evidences  of  miraculous 
power  and  with  the  strong  manifestations  of  the 
Spirit.  So  that  in  the  result  the  work  of  pro- 
claiming the  gospel  had  been  accomplished, 
starting  from  Jerusalem,  in  an  extending  circuit - 
or  irregular  progress,  as  far  as  Illyria. 

This  world-wide  mission  would  give  St.  Paul 
his  title  to  visit  Rome  ^.  But  its  very  greatness 
has  hitherto  hindered  him.  Now  however  he 
is  hoping  to  satisfy  the  desire  that  has  so  long 
possessed  him,  and  to  pay  them  a  visit  of  some 
length  on  his  way  to  Spain.  That  is  to  say,  he 
hopes  to  come  to  them  when  the  task  is  over 


'  lii.  15,  according  to  the  Greek. 

*  '  Round  about,'  literally  '■  in  a  circle,'  as  opposed  to  a  straight 
course  ;  cf.  Mark  vi,  6,  '  round  about  the  villages.' 
=>  Cf.  i.  13-16. 


Excuses^  hopes,  and  fears         173 

which  is  immediately  occupying  him.  The 
good  will  of  the  churches  in  Macedonia  and 
Achaia  has  shown  itself  in  a  collection  of  money 
for  the  poor  Christians  at  Jerusalem.  This  is 
really  the  payment  of  a  debt  to  those  to  whom 
they  owe  their  fellowship  in  Christ's  salvation. 
When  then  St.  Paul  has  handed  over  this 
collection,  and  secured  to  its  recipients  this  fruit 
of  his  mission,  he  hopes  to  pass  to  Spain  by 
way  of  Rome  ;  and  again,  as  in  his  introduction \ 
he  expresses  his  confidence  that  at  Rome,  as 
elsewhere,  the  fullness  of  the  rich  gifts  of  Christ 
will  accompany  his  coming. 

Meanwhile  he  makes  his  urgent  request,  by 
their  allegiance  to  Christ  and  their  fellowship  in 
the  spirit  of  love,  that  they  will  join  with  him 
in  wrestling  with  God  in  prayer  for  the  success 
of  his  present  undertaking— that  he  may  escape 
the  danger  to  which  he  is  exposed  from  the 
hostility  of  the  unbelieving  Jews,  and  that  the 
gift,  as  ministered  by  him,  may  not  prove  un- 
acceptable to  the  Jerusalem  church ;  so  that  he 
may  get  happily  to  Rome  and  find  repose  there 
with  them.  And  he  prays  for  the  blessing  of 
the  God  of  peace  upon  all  of  them. 


174        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

And  I  myself  also  am  persuaded  of  you,  my  brethren, 
that  ye  yourselves  are  full  of  goodness,  filled  with  all 
knowledge,  able  also  to  admonish  one  another.  But 
I  write  the  more  boldly  unto  you  in  some  measure,  as 
putting  you  again  in  remembrance,  because  of  the  grace 
that  was  given  me  of  God,  that  I  should  be  a  minister  of 
Christ  Jesus  unto  the  Gentiles,  ministering^  the  gospel 
of  God,  that  the  offering  up  of  the  Gentiles  might  be 
made  acceptable,  being  sanctified  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 
I  have  therefore  my  glorj^ing  in  Christ  Jesus  in  things 
pertaining  to  God.  For  I  will  not  dare  to  speak  of  any 
things  save  those  which  Christ  wrought  through  me,  for 
the  obedience  of  the  Gentiles,  by  word  and  deed,  in  the 
power  of  signs  and  wonders,  in  the  power  of  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  so  that  from  Jerusalem,  and  round  about  even 
unto  Illyricum,  I  have  fully  preached  the  gospel  of  Christ; 
yea,  making  it  my  aim  so  to  preach  the  gospel,  not  where 
Christ  was  already  named,  that  I  might  not  build  upon 
another  man's  foundation  ;  but,  as  it  is  written. 

They  shall  see,  to  whom  no  tidings  of  him  came, 
And  they  who  have  not  heard  shall  understand. 
Wherefore  also  I  was  hindered  these  many  times  from 
coming  to  you :  but  now,  having  no  more  any  place  in 
these  regions,  and  having  these  many  years  a  longing  to 
come  unto  you,  whensoever  I  go  unto  Spain  (for  I  hope 
to  see  you  in  my  journey,  and  to  be  brought  on  my  way 
thitherward  by  you,  if  first  in  some  measure  I  shall  have 
been  satisfied  with  your  company)— but  now,  /  say,  I  go 
unto  Jerusalem,  ministering  unto  the  saints.  For  it  hath 
been  the  good  pleasure  of  Macedonia  and  Achaia  to  make 
a  certain  contribution  for  the  poor  among  the  saints  that 
are  at  Jerusalem.  Yea,  it  hath  been  their  good  pleasure; 
and  their  debtors  they  are.   For  if  the  Gentiles  have  been 

^  *  Ministering  in  sacrifice '  marg. 


Excuses,  hopes,  and  fears         175 

made  partakers  of  their  spiritual  things,  they  owe  it  to 
them  also  to  minister  unto  them  in  carnal  things.  When 
therefore  I  have  accomplished  this,  and  have  sealed  to 
them  this  fruit,  I  will  go  on  by  you  unto  Spain.  And 
I  know  that,  when  I  come  unto  you,  I  shall  come  in  the 
fulness  of  the  blessing  of  Christ. 

Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
and  by  the  love  of  the  Spirit,  that  ye  strive  together  with 
me  in  your  prayers  to  God  for  me  ;  that  I  may  be  deli- 
vered from  them  that  are  disobedient  in  Judaea,  and  that 
my  ministration  which  /  have  for  Jerusalem  may  be 
acceptable  to  the  saints ;  that  I  may  come  unto  you  in 
joy  through  the  will  of  God,  and  together  with  you  find 
rest.     Now  the  God  of  peace  be  with  you  all.    Amen. 

I.  St.  Paul  has  a  habit  of  representing  those 
he  writes  to  in  the  best  hght^  But  the  words 
'full  of  goodness,'  'filled  with  all  knowledge,' 
'able  to  admonish,'  are  no  idle  compliments.  It 
is  not  too  much  to  suggest  that  St.  Paul,  as  he 
sees  the  high  part  which  the  church  of  the 
capital  must  pla}^  in  the  world,  perceives  also, 
in  what  he  hears  of  the  Roman  Christians, 
evidences  of  the  spirit  which  will  enable  them  to 
fulfil  it.  And  history  verifies  the  apostle's 
anticipation.  The  letter  of  the  Roman  church 
to  the  Corinthians,  which  passes  under  Clement's 
name,  and  was  written  some  fort}^  years  after 

'  Cf.  the  opening  of  i   Cor.,  a  letter  which  contains  on   the 
whole  so  much  blame. 


176        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

this  letter  of  St.  Paul's,  is  the  very  embodiment 
of  the  spirit  of  goodness,  knowledge,  and  power 
to  admonish.  The  princely  generosity  of  the 
Roman  church  in  all  directions  was  proverbial 
in  the  second  century^.  If  it  did  not  become 
as  distinguished  as  Alexandria  in  theological 
science,  it  did  become  a  chief  centre  of  theo- 
logical orthodoxy  and  government.  And  the 
repeated  evidences  we  gain  that  rigorists,  from 
Hippolytus  to  Novatian,  were  so  dissatisfied  with 
the  policy  of  the  Roman  bishops  as  to  separate 
themselves  from  their  communion,  give  us  good 
reason  to  believe  that  the  internal  policy  of  this 
church  was,  within  just  limits,  Hberal  and  tolerant. 
2.  St.  Paul  here  describes  his  apostolic  com- 
mission in  priestly  language.  'The  sacrificial 
terminology  is  far  more  marked  in  the  original 
than  it  can  be  in  a  translation^.'  The  word 
for  'minister  of  Christ  Jesus'  is  a  technical 
word  for  priest  in  the  Greek  Old  Testament  ^ 
The  word  translated  '  ministering '  means  '  offer- 
ing sacrifice.'    (That  which  St.  Paul  describes 

'  Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  23. 

^  Sanday,  Conception  of  Priesthood  (Longmans),  p.  89. 

^  Like  '■  agape  '  (see  above,  p.  131,  n.  2)  so  this  word  '  liturgus  ' 
appears  to  have  been  adopted  in  its  priestly  sense  by  the  Greek 
translators  of  the  Bible  from  the  current  Greek  of  Alexandria,  cf. 
Deissmann,  Bibelstudien,  pp.  137  f. 


Excuses,  hopes,  and  fears         177 

himself  as  offering  in  sacrifice  is  not  the  gospel, 
as  our  translation  might  imply :  the  gospel 
assigns  the  sphere  of  the  sacrifice  \  but  the 
sacrifice  he  has  to  offer  is  that  of  the  Gentile 
world,  in  Christ,  consecrated  to  be  a  fit  sacrifice 
by  the  Spirit.)  The  phrase  also,  *  in  things  per- 
taining to  God '  (cf.  Hebr.  ii.  17),  is  appropriate 
to  the  priest  as  he  stands  before  God.  *  But 
this  is  all  symbolical  language,'  it  is  said.  That 
depends  on  what  we  take  as  the  standard  of 
reality  in  the  sacrificing  priesthood.  If  Christ 
is  the  standard  of  priesthood,  and  His  method  of 
making  sacrifice  the  standard  method,  then  St. 
Paul's  account  of  his  priestliness  is  not  appre- 
ciably metaphorical,  except  so  far  as  metaphor 
belongs  to  all  earthly  expressions  of  heavenly 
realities  ;  it  is  rather  true  to  say  that  the  Jewish 
or  heathen  priest,  with  his  material  victims,  was 
but  the  dim  shadow  of  a  true  priest. 

The  point  is  that  the  true  Christian  idea  of 
sacrifice  makes  the  substance  of  it  to  be  always 
persons  returning  to  God  the  life  He  gave  them. 
If  we  must  offer  sacrifices  of  money  and  fruits 
of  the  earth,  that  is  because  we  cannot  offer 
ourselves   without   our  bodies^,  or  our  bodies 

^  Cf.  S.  and  H.  in  loc.     *  Making  sacrifice  as  a  priest  under  the 
Gospel.'  =*  Cf.  xii.  I. 

II.  N 


178        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

without  the  material  supphes  on  which  they 
depend.  'All  things  come  of  God,  and  of  His 
own  do  we  give  Him/  And  all  our  labour  and 
prayer  for  others  must  be  an  offering  of  them, 
or  a  preparation  to  offer  them\  to  God;  which 
again  is  only  our  assisting  them  to  offer  them- 
selves. And  all  this  offering  in  sacrifice  of  our- 
selves and  others  is  rendered  possible  by  the 
one  effectual  sacrifice,  through  which  alone  we 
and  all  men  have  access  to  the  Father.  It  takes 
place  'in  Christ  Jesus,'  who,  'through  eternal 
Spirit  offered  himself  without  spot  to  God.' 
There,  at  the  head  of  all,  is  the  sacrifice  of  the 
person,  and  that  person  the  Son  of  Man,  who 
can  take  up  into  His  very  life  and  sacrifice  even 
all  mankind.  Throughout  it  is  a  sacrifice  of 
persons,  or  of  things  only  as  appertaining  to 
persons.  This  is  the  fundamental  Christian 
idea,  and  this  at  the  bottom  necessarily  forbids 
us  to  separate  the  thing  offered  from  the  person 
offering,  the  victim  from  the  priest.  The  priest 
is  the  victim,  for  what  he  offers  is  himself. 

It  is  this  idea  of  sacrifice 'which  is  realized 
in  the  eucharist.  The  eucharist  is  the  central 
sacrifice  of  the  Christian  body.     It  is  to  start 

^  Col.  i.  28  :  *  Teaching  every  man  .  .  .  that  we  may  present 
every  man/  i.  e.  present  him  in  sacrifice. 


Excuses,  hopes,  and  fears         179 

with  a  presentation  of  material  things,  bread 
and  wine  of  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  with  alms  and 
other  offerings  it  may  be :  and  these  oblations 
are  accompanied  with  prayers  and  symbolic  rites. 
But  all  is  done  that  both  by  word  and  act  the 
One  vSacrifice  may  be  commemorated  and 
pleaded.  The  outward  rite  but  finds  its  mean- 
ing and  justification  in  that— the  sacrifice  of  the 
Person.  Again  we  can  only  take  part  in  it  with 
any  spiritual  reahty  by  becoming  ourselves 
sharers  of  His  sacrifice — ourselves  the  sacri- 
fice we  offer.  'And  here,'  we  cry,  'we  offer 
a  present  unto  Thee  ourselves.'  We  men, 
St.  Augustine  does  not  scruple  to  say,  are  the 
body  of  Christ,  which  is  offered  in  that  sacrificed 
And  a  quite  new  light  is  shed  on  intercessory 
prayer,  in  the  eucharist  and  in  the  rest  of  life, 
when  we  view  it  as  St.  Paul  would  have  us 
view  it,  as  a  presenting  in  sacrifice  before  God 
those  for  whom  we  pray,  according  to  the  true 
idea  of  them  which  the  sanctification  of  the  Spirit 
would  make  possible  and  actual.  And  a  quite 
new  light  is  shed  upon  all  work  for  others, 
when  we  regard  it  as  the  preparing  of  such 
a  sacrifice  for  the  Holy  Spirit  to  consecrate. 
From  a  different  point  of  view  St.  Paul's  con- 

*  For  his  repeated  statements  see  app.  note  I.  p.  240. 
N  2 


i8o        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

ception  of  his  mission  as  the  priest  of  the  Gentile 
world,  might  well  suggest  reflections  to  the 
Church  of  England.  If  a  Christian  nation  in 
the  providence  of  God  is  to  overrun  the  world 
and  possess  the  nations  not  yet  Christian,  it 
goes  with  a  mission  entrusted  to  it  by  God. 
Its  mission  may  be  expressed,  according  to 
St.  Paul's  idea,  as  that  of  evangelizing  the  world, 
but  also  as  that  of  preparing  the  heathen 
nations  to  be  offered  to  God.  It  is  the  return 
of  all  humanity  to  Himself  that  God  desires, 
and  we  are  to  be  the  ministers  of  this  perfected 
offering.  It  strikes  us  with  profound  humilia- 
tion to  realize  how  ^  far  fetched '  St.  Paul's  idea 
would  appear  to-day  to  the  mass  of  our  nation, 
which,  more  than  any  other,  is  called  by  circum- 
stances to  an  apostolate  of  the  world. 

3.  St.  Paul  speaks,  here  and  in  many  places 
elsewhere,  of  his  grounds  for  'glorying,'  or  rather 
'  boasting  V  in  what  Christ  has  wrought  through 
him,  and  of  his  'being  ambitious'  to  preach 
only  where  no  one  had  been  before  him  I  And 
in  reading  such   passages  the  question  some- 

^  Cf.  I  Cor.  ix.  15  ;  xv.  31  ;  2  Cor.  i.  14  ;  vii.  4,  14  ;  viii.  24  ; 
ix.  3  ;  X.  8,  13  ;  xi.  10,  16— xii.  9  ;  Phil.  ii.  16  ;  i  Thess.  ii.  19. 
These  passages  are  worth  examining  in  connexion. 

'  Cf.  2  Cor.  X.  15,  i6. 


Excuses,  hopes,  and  fears         i8i 

times  arises  in  Christian  minds — was  there,  after 
all,  a  strain  of  egotism  unsubdued  in  St.  Paul's 
character  ?  Now  no  doubt,  unlike  other  apostles 
whose  writings  remain  in  the  New  Testament, 
St.  Paul  had  that  sort  of  passionately  personal 
and  individual  nature  which  easily  passes  into 
spiritual  egotism.  This  at  least  is  discernible 
in  his  epistles.  It  is  also  true  that  the  necessity 
which  lay  so  long  upon  him  of  vindicating  his 
own  apostolic  authorit}^,  makes  it  necessary  for 
him  at  times  to  talk  about  himself  and  his  experi- 
ences and  his  personal  methods  in  a  way  that  to 
some  minds  suggests  egotism ;  and  there  is  no 
obligation  upon  us  to  maintain  that  St.  Paul  was 
perfect.  But  we  only  understand  these  passages 
aright  when  we  remember  that  there  runs 
through  them  all  a  conscious  irony.  The  basis 
of  St.  Paul's  whole  theology  was  the  denial  of 
any  possible  ground  for  a  man  to  boast  in  him- 
self '  Where  is  boasting?  it  is  excluded.'  *  He 
that  boasteth,  let  him  boast  in  the  Lord.'  It  is 
Christ  who  'leads  St.  Paul  in'  His  'triumph.' 
What  he  boasts  of  is  not  his  own,  but  Christ's. 
Of  course,  this  sort  of  language  very  easily 
admits  of  self-deception.  St.  Paul  shows  him- 
self conscious  of  its  danger^     But  there  can 

^  See  2  Cor.  xi.  17  ;  xii.  i. 


i82        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

be  no  question  of  the  vehement  sincerity  of 
St.  Paul  in  repudiating  any  homage  to  himself 
which  seemed  to  put  him  in  the  place  of  Christ, 
or  to  substitute  the  teacher  for  his  messaged 
And  where  his  personal  gifts  of  intellect  might 
most  easily  have  shone,  he  had  determined  to 
abjure  all  '  the  wisdom  of  men '  in  the  method 
of  his  preaching  "^  It  is  remarkable  again  that 
as  soon  as  ever  the  real  peril  from  Judaism  was 
over  in  the  Church,  St.  Paul  drops  his  anti- 
Judaistic  polemic,  and  all  that  brings  the  per- 
sonal element  into  prominence.  He  is  abso- 
lutely free  from  the  charge  of  pursuing  his 
advantage  so  as  to  magnify  a  personal  victory. 
The  more  thoroughly  we  grow  to  know  St.  Paul, 
the  more,  I  think,  we  feel  that  his  profession  is 
true  that  he  will  *  boast '  only  '  in  the  cross  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ' ;  and  that  truly  the  world, 
with  all  its  personal  ambitions,  had  been  for 
him  nailed  to  the  cross  and  killed^. 

But  what  exactly  was  it  that  St.  Paul  had  to 
'  boast '  that  Christ  had  wrought  through  him  ? 

He  had,  he  says,  accomplished  the  preaching 
of  the  gospel  in  an  irregular  circuit  from  Jeru- 
salem to  lUyria.  After  he  had  made  a  begin- 
ning of  Christian  preaching  at  Damascus,  he 

^  I  Cor.  i.  13  ff.  'I  Cor.  ii.  1-5.  ^  Gal.  vi.  14. 


Excuses^  hopeSy  and  fears         183 

had,  in  fact,  shared  the  apostoHc  preaching  at 
Jerusalem  (Acts  ix.  29),  but  his  own  special  work 
began  at  Tarsus,  or  rather  at  Antioch.  After 
that  he  had  'fulfilled  the  proclamation  of  the 
gospel,'  so  far,  that  is  to  say,  as  it  belonged 
to  the  apostolic  office,  by  founding  churches  in 
a  gradually  enlarging  circuit,  especially  in  the 
chief  centres,  as  the  narrative  of  the  Acts  shows 
us,  till  travelling  by  the  Egnatian  way  he  would 
have  come  within  sight  of  the  lUyrian  mountains 
at  Thessalonica\  He  may  even  have  entered 
Illyria  when  the  Acts  vaguely  describes  him  as 
going  to  Macedonia  and  then  '  passing  through 
those  parts  ^ ' ;  but  the  expression  in  this  epistle 
does  not  require  this.  It  is  sufficient  that  the 
border  of  Illyria,  through  which  the  Egnatian 
way  led  to  Rome,  had  been  so  far  his  nearest 
point  to  the  capital. 

St.  Paul  certainly  implies  that  Rome  was 
included  in  his  province  of  work,  and  that  he 
owed  them  a  yet  unpaid  debt\  This  must 
surely  mean,  according  to  St.  Paul's  principle, 
that  no  other  of  the  greater  apostles  had  yet 
evangelized  them  or  founded  the  church  there^. 

^  See  5.  and  H.  in  loc.  ^  Acts  xx.  2.  '  i.  14,  15. 

*  Not  Peter  therefore,  though  he  was  doubtless  afterwards  at 
Rome. 


184        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

Rome  was  no  other  man's  foundation.  But 
none  the  less,  the  elements  of  a  church  had 
collected  there.  The  gospel  was  being  preached 
there  b}^  'apostles'  from  among  his  own 
circle.  And  St.  Paul,  for  this  reason,  does  not 
contemplate  any  permanent  stay  with  the 
Romans,  but  regards  Rome  only  as  a  place 
where  he  can  rest  and  refresh  himself,  as  well  as 
supply  deficiencies  in  the  spiritual  equipment  of 
the  church  there,  before  he  passes  further  west 
to  the  untouched  region  of  Spain.  St.  Paul, 
we  see  plainly  enough,  had  no  power  to  foresee 
the  future.  But  after  the  long  residence  at 
Rome  during  his  first  captivity,  which  he  did 
not  the  least  anticipate,  did  he,  we  ask,  actually 
get  to  Spain?  There  is  certainly  no  good 
reason  to  say  he  did  not,  for  his  movements  are, 
in  the  main,  unknown  to  us  in  the  last  period  of 
his  life ;  and  on  the  other  hand  in  Clement's 
letter  to  the  Corinthians,  written  within  the  first 
century,  he  is  said  to  have  passed  before  his 
mart3Tdom  to  '  the  limits  of  the  west ' — the  ex- 
treme west— which  is  certainly  most  naturally 
interpreted  of  Spain  \ 

4.  St.  Paul  speaks  of  having  wrought  'signs 
and  wonders.'    The  two  words  are  habitually 

'^  Ad  Cor.  5,  see  Lightfoot  in  loc. 


Excuses,  hopes,  and  fears         185 

combined  in  the  New  Testament.  The  word 
'wonders'  describes  the  miraculous  and  astonish- 
ing character  of  the  events,  while  'signs '  indicates 
that  moral  witness  and  significance  which  distin- 
guishes Christian  miracles  from  vulgar  portents. 
We  read  of  St.  Paul  working  miracles  in  the 
Acts.  What  he  says  here,  and  elsewhere  \ 
implies  that  they  were  frequently  worked,  and 
especially  at  Corinth,  where  no  such  events  are 
recorded  in  the  history.  What  it  is  important 
for  us  to  recognize  is,  that  St.  Paul  so  plainly 
and  repeatedly  appeals,  in  the  face  of  those  who 
could  bear  witness,  to  the  fact  that  he  himself 
had  power  given  to  him  to  work  miracles,  as  if  it 
were  indisputable. 

5.  St.  Paul  tells  us  that  he  had  it  specially 
laid  upon  him  by  the  apostles  of  the  circum- 
cision that  he  was  to  '  remember  the  poor,' 
i.  e.  the  poor  Christians  at  Jerusalem ;  where 
poverty  was  specially  rife,  because,  as  we  should 
gather,  the  wealthier  Jews  had  held  aloof  from 
Christianity  2.  And  this,  he  adds,  was  the  very 
thing  he  himself  was  zealous  to  do '.  How 
much  it  was  in  his  mind,  both  the  Acts  and  his 
own  epistles  bear  witness.    We  hear  much  in 

*  2  Cor.  xii.  12.  "^  Cf.  Jas.  ii.  5,  6. 

^  Gal.  ii.  10. 


1 86        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

the  epistles  to  the  Corinthians^  of  the  collection 
made  in  the  churches  of  Macedonia  and  Achaia. 
Not  only  was  this  expression  of  Gentile  good 
will  intended  to  conciliate  the  half-alienated  and 
suspicious  Jewish  Christians  of  Jerusalem,  but 
the  acceptance  of  the  gift  at  St.  Paul's  hands,  as 
the  fruit  of  his  own  labour,  was  to  diminish  their 
suspicion  of  himself.  St.  Paul  was  at  pains  to 
prevent  any  suspicion  attaching  to  his  adminis- 
tration of  this  bounty,  and  at  every  point  we 
perceive  how  much  trouble  he  took  about  the 
matter.  But,  hopeful  and  zealous  as  he  was 
about  this  work  of  charity,  he  did  not  underrate 
its  dangers.  His  urgent  request  for  the  Roman 
Christians'  prayers  in  this  passage,  and  his  readi- 
ness to  meet  his  death,  if  need  be,  at  Jerusalem, 
as  expressed  in  the  narrative  of  the  Acts,  show 
us  that  he  knew  the  danger  he  was  incurring 
from  the  fierce  hostility  of  the  Jerusalem  Jews. 

6.  This  passage  about  the  collection  ^,  coupled 
with  the  allusion  to  Cenchreae,  the  port  of 
Corinth,  at  the  beginning  of  the  next  chapter, 
and  the  allusion  to  the  Corinthian  Gains  as 
St.  Paul's  host^  enable  us  to  fix  the  occasion  of 

'   I  Cor.  xvi.  1-4  ;  2  Cor.  viii,  ix.  ^  Cf.  Acts  xxiv.  17. 

^  Rom.  xvi.  23.  Cf.  I  Cor.  i.  14,  which  shows  us  a  Gaius  at 
Corinth.  Cf.  the  allusion  to  Erastus  in  the  same  verse,  coupled 
with  2  Tim.  iv.  20. 


Excuses^  hopeSy  and  fears         187 

the  writing  of  this  epistle  exactly  at  the  moment 
recorded  in  Acts  xx.  3 — the  end  of  his  three 
months'  residence  in  Greece.  We  also  gather 
from  the  Acts\  as  well  as  from  this  epistle, 
that  it'  was  his  intention  at  that  period,  when 
he  had  paid  his  visit  to  Jerusalem,  to  go  to 
Rome.  Once  more  we  know  from  the  Acts'- 
that  Sosipater  and  Timothy  were  with  him  at 
this  point,  and  they  join  in  the  greetings  of 
the  epistle  ^  So  that  all  the  indications  taken 
together  fix  with  wonderful  accuracy  the  exact 
point  when  the  epistle  was  written  *. 

7.  We  do  well  to  note  the  word  used  by 
St.  Paul  in  asking  the  Roman  Christians'  prayers. 
He  begs  them  to  'strive  together'  with  him  in 
their  prayers.  This  word  is  a  derivative  of  that 
which  describes  our  Lord's  '  agony '  in  prayer ; 
and  Origen's  comment  upon  it  is  this :  '  Hardly 
any  one  can  pray  without  some  idle  and  alien 
thought  coming  into  his  mind,  and  leading  off 
and  interrupting  the  intended  direction  of  his 
mind  to  God.  .  .  .  And,  therefore,  prayer  is 
a  great  striving  (agoiiy  wrestling),  so  that  the 
fixed  direction  of  the  soul  towards  God  may 

'  Acts  xix.  21.  2  Acts  XX.  4. 

^  Rom.  xvi.  21. 

*  See  further,  on  the  purpose  of  the  epistle,  vol.  i.  pp.  4  ff. 


i88        TJie  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

be  maintained,  in  spite  of  the  enemies  which 
interfere  and  seek  to  scatter  the  sense  of  prayer; 
so  that  one  who  prays  may  justly  say,  with 
St.  Paul,  ''  I  have  fought  a  good  fight ;  I  have 
finished  my  course.'" 


A  coDitnendation  189 


DIVISION  VI.  §  2.    Chapter  XVI.  1-2. 

A  commendation. 

One  strong  link  among  Christians  of  different 
towns,  constraining  them  to  remember  that  their 
brotherhood  did  not  depend  on  physical  near- 
ness or  personal  acquaintance,  lay  in  the  '  letters 
of  commendation'  from  one  local  church  to 
another,  which  the  Christian  traveller  carried 
with  him.  And  here  we  have  an  example  of 
such  a  letter  given  by  St.  Paul  to  the  Corinthian 
deaconess,  Phoebe,  who  was  probably  the  bearer 
of  his  letter  to  the  Roman  Christians. 

I  commend  unto  you  Phoebe  our  sister,  who  is  a  ser- 
vant ^  of  the  church  that  is  at  Cenchreae :  that  ye  receive 
her  in  the  Lord,  worthily  of  the  saints,  and  that  ye  assist 
her  in  whatsoever  matter  she  may  have  need  of  you : 
for  she  herself  also  hath  been  a  succourer  of  many,  and 
of  mine  own  self. 

The  necessity  of  instructing  women  inquirers 
or  catechumens,  visiting  them  at  their  homes, 
preparing  them  for  baptism,  attending  to  their 

*  Or  deaconess,  as  margin. 


iQo        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

unclothing  and  reclothing  at  the  font,  and  looking 
after  them  afterwards,  forced  upon  the  Church 
the  institution  of  an  order  of  deaconesses,  side 
by  side  with  the  deacons  and  for  similar  pur- 
poses. Pliny  found  these  female  officers  among 
the  Christians  in  Bithynia  in  the  beginning  of 
the  second  century,  and  there  is  no  reason  why 
already  at  this  date  the  female  order  should 
not  have  existed \  'Here  we  learn/  says 
Origen  on  this  passage,  'that  female  ministers 
are  recognized  in  the  Church.' 

Phoebe  is  also  called  a  succourer  or  'patroness' 
of  Christians,  including  St.  Paul,  which  suggests 
a  woman  of  wealth  and  influence.  If  so,  we  have 
here  an  example  of  wealth,  not  asserting  itself  but 
devoting  itself  to  service,  according  to  our  Lord's 
teaching:  'He  that  is  greatest  among  you  shall 
be  your  servant  (deacon)';  'I  am  in  the  midst 
of  you  as  he  that  serveth  (the  deacon)^.'  Such 
an  one  is  to  be  received  in  a  manner  'worthy 
of  the  saints,'  the  consecrated  family  of  God, 
and  to  be  allowed  to  lack  nothing  which  the 
Roman  Christians  can  supply  her  with. 

^  See  on  this  subject  Deaconess  Cecilia  Robinson,  The  Ministry 
of  Deaconesses  (Methuen,  1898),  and  Bernard,  Pastoral  Epistles, 
p.  59.  With  Lightfoot,  he  interprets  i  Tim.  iii.  11  of  deaconesses 
rather  than  of  the  wives  of  the  deacons. 

^  Matt,  xxiii.  11  ;  Luke  xxii.  27. 


Personal  greetings  191 


DIVISION  VI.  §  3.     Chapter  XVI.  3-16. 

Personal  greetings. 

Then  St.  Paul,  according  to  his  custom,  winds 
up  his  epistle  with  personal  greetings.  In  this 
case  they  are  sent  to  the  individual  Christians, 
among  those  who  from  various  parts  of  the 
empire  had  collected  at  Rome,  whose  names 
his  memory — so  retentive  of  personal  relation- 
ships—enabled him  to  recall. 

Salute  Prisca  and  Aquila  my  fellow-workers  in  Christ 
Jesus,  who  for  my  life  laid  down  their  own  necks  ;  unto 
whom  not  only  I  give  thanks,  but  also  all  the  churches  of 
the  Gentiles  :  and  aalufe  the  church  that  is  in  their  house. 
Salute  Epaenetus  my  beloved,  who  is  the  firstfruits  of  Asia 
unto  Christ.  Salute  Mary,  who  bestowed  nmch  labour  on 
you.  Salute  Andronicus  and  Junias  \  my  kinsmen,  and 
my  fellow-prisoners,  who  are  of  note  among  the  apostles, 
who  also  have  been  in  Christ  before  me.  Salute  Amplia- 
tus  my  beloved  in  the  Lord.  Salute  Urbanus  our  fellow- 
worker  in  Christ,  and  Stachys  my  beloved.  Salute 
Apelles  the  approved  in  Christ.     Salute  them  which  are 

^  Or  Jum'a  (a  woman's  name),  as  margin. 


192        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


of  the  household  of  Aristobulus.  Salute  Herodion  my 
kinsman.  Salute  them  of  the  household  of  Narcissus, 
which  are  in  the  Lord.  Salute  Tr3^phsena  and  Tryphosa, 
who  labour  in  the  Lord.  Salute  Persis  the  beloved,  which 
laboured  much  in  the  Lord.  Salute  Rufus  the  chosen  in 
the  Lord,  and  his  mother  and  mine.  Salute  Asyncritus, 
Phlegon,  Hermes,  Patrobas,  Hermas,  and  the  brethren 
that  are  with  them.  Salute  Philologus  and  Julia,  Nereus 
and  his  sister,  and  Olympas,  and  all  the  saints  that  are 
with  them.  Salute  one  another  with  a  holy  kiss.  All  the 
churches  of  Christ  salute  you. 

I.  Aquila,  a  Pontic  Jew,  had  resided  in  Rome, 
doubtless  in  pursuit  of  his  business  as  a  tent- 
maker;  but  the  edict  of  Claudius  had  compelled 
him  to  quit  the  capital  in  common  with  his 
brethren,  and  he  had  taken  refuge  at  Corinth 
with  his  wife  Prisca  (as  St.  Paul  calls  her),  or 
Priscilla  (according  to  St.  Luke^);  and  there, 
shortly  after  their  arrival,  St.  Paul  had  found 
them,  made  their  acquaintance,  and  combined 
with  them  in  a  common  trade.  To  this  was  possi- 
bly due  their  conversion  to  Christianity.  When 
St.  Paul  left  Corinth,  they  accompanied  him 
to  Ephesus,  and  remained  there  when  he  left 
for  Jerusalem;  their  influential  position  in  the 
Christian  community  being  indicated  to  us  by 
their  deaUngs  with  so  important  a  teacher  as 

^  See  the  readings  of  Rom.  xvi.  3  ;    i  Cor.  xvi.  19  ;   2  Tim.  iv. 
19  (in  R.  V.  which  is  probably  right)  ;  and  of  Acts  xviii.  2,  18,  26. 


Personal  greetings  193 

Apollos.  When  St.  Paul  had  returned  to 
Ephesus,  and  was  writing  his  First  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians,  their  house  was  the  centre 
for  a  Christian  congregation  ^.  It  was  possibly 
during  the  Ephesian  disturbances  that  they 
risked  their  lives,  or  'laid  down  their  own 
necks '  for  St.  Paul.  Whether  on  account  of 
this  peril  incurred,  or  for  whatever  reason,  they 
returned,  as  they  were  now  free  to  do,  to  Rome. 
The  Epistle  to  the  Romans  follows  the  First 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  by  not  more  than 
a  year,  and  it  finds  Prisca  and  Aquila  estabhshed 
at  Rome,  with  a  church  meeting  at  their  house. 
Probably  they  had  been  St.  Paul's  informants  as 
to  affairs  among  the  Roman  Christians.  A  good 
many  years  afterwards,  when  St.  Paul  was 
writing  his  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy-,  we 
hear  of  them  again  at  Ephesus.  So  much 
travelling  as  we  find  in  their  life  was  not 
unusual  in  the  Roman  empire,  and  perhaps 
least  of  all  among  the  Jews. 

The  fact  that  Priscilla  is  generally  mentioned 
before  her  husband,  both  by  St.  Paul  and  St. 
Luke^  as  if  she  were  more  important,  combined 
with  (i)  a  tradition  which  connects  her  with  the 

*  I  Cor.  xvi.  19.  2  2  Tim.  iv.  19. 

^  Twice  out  of  three  mentions  in  each  case. 
II.  O 


194        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

titulus  (or  parish- church)  Priscae  at  Rome,  (2) 
evidence  connecting  the  Coemeterium  Priscillae 
with  the  Acihan  gens, — has  led  some  scholars 
to  believe  that  Priscilla  was  a  noble  Roman  lady 
married  to  a  Jewish  husband.  But  the  evidence 
is  not  cogent,  and  it  is  more  likely  that  both  she 
and  her  husband  owed  their  Roman  names  to 
being  freedmen  \  It  was  probably  her  promin- 
ence among  the  Christians  which  led  to  her  name 
preceding  that  of  her  husband.  We  need  only 
think  of  Phoebe  and  Priscilla  to  understand  how 
influential  women  were  in  the  earliest  Christian 
churches. 

'  The  church  (which  met)  at  their  house '  is 
a  significant  phrase  ^.  The  wealthier  Christians, 
or  those  whose  houses  were  commodious, 
turned  them  into  churches,  where  the  neigh- 
bouring Christians  met  for  worship,  love  feast 
and  eucharist.     Several  of  the  oldest  churches 


^  Perhaps  both  freedmen  of  the  same  member  of  the  Acilian 
gens.  For  Priscus  or  Prisca  (or  Priscilla)  was  a  favourite  cogno- 
men in  the  gens,  and  the  nomen  itself  was  commonly  written 
Aquilius.  This  nomen  a  male  slave,  when  freed,  would  have  borne 
(besides  his  own  name  and  his  master's  praenomen);  and  a  female 
could  have  borne  the  cognomen  Prisca  or  Priscilla.  'AkvXios 
could  be  corrupted  into  'A«uAas,  the  Greek  form  of  a  different 
name  Aquila. 

^  Cf.  Acts  xii.  12  ;  Col.  iv.  15  ;  Philem.  2.     See  5.  andH.  tn  he. 


Per'sonal  greetings  195 

in    Rome  grew  in  this  manner  out  of  private 
houses. 

2.  St.  Paul's  brief  characterizations  of  indivi- 
duals are  full  of  personal  memory  and  tender- 
ness— 'my  beloved,  who  is  the  firstfruits  of  Asia 
unto  Christ V  'who  bestowed  much  labour  on 
you,' '  my  kinsmen  (i.  e.  Jews)  and  fellov/  prisoners 
(on  some  occasion  which  we  cannot  ^:^^  but  which 
St.  Paul  remembers),  who  also  were  in  Ghrist 
before  me,'  '  our  fellow  worker,'  '  the  man  ap- 
proved in  Christ,'  who  has  been  tried  and  found 
not  wanting,  *  his  mother  and  mine.'  St.  Paul, 
notwithstanding  his  wide  ecclesiastical  plans  and 
theological  labours,  as  he  thought  no  pains  too 
much  to  bestow  on  the  details  of  his  scheme  for 
collecting  Gentile  money  for  the  needs  of  poor 
Jews,  so  also  never  lets  great  designs  obscure 
the  memory  of  persons  and  their  intricate  rela- 
tions to  himself. 

3.  Andronicus and  Junias  (orjunianus)  are  'of 
note  among  the  apostles.'  There  are  other 
indications  that  the  term  'apostle'  was  not 
confined  to  the  twelve.  Not  St.  Paul  only,  but 
Barnabas  also,  and  the  Lord's  brother,  were 
included  in  it.  Later,  in  the  Didache,  we  find  it 
used  in  a  wide  but  somewhat  dim  sense,  for  the 

^  Cf.  I  Cor,  xvi.  15. 
O  2 


196        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

chief  teachers  of  the  Church  who  were  not  settled 
in  particular  churches  ^  Nevertheless,  this  pas- 
sage describing  two  men  of  unknown  names  as 
'  conspicuous  among  the  apostles '  is  surprising. 
Probably  the  real  requirement  for  sharing  the 
title  of  apostle  was  to  have  received  commission 
from  the  Lord  (as  '  other  seventy '  did  besides 
the  Twelve),  and  to  have  seen  Him  after  His 
resurrection.  These  two— 'early  disciples'  as 
St.  Paul  tells  us — may  have  fulfilled  these  re- 
quirements. They  were  Jews  like  himself, 
who  with  him  had  laboured  and  suffered.  The}^ 
would  be  centres  of  authority  among  the  Chris- 
tians at  Rome  - :  and  possibly  to  the  laying  on 
of  their  hands  other  brethren  at  Rome  who 
*  ruled  '  or  '  taught '  or  '  ministered  '  owed  their 
qualifying  gift. 

Chrysostom  takes  the  second  name  to  be  a 
woman's — Junia ;  and  expresses  his  astonishment 
at  finding  a  woman  thought  worth}^  of  the  title 
of  an  apostle. 

4.  '  Them  that  are  of  the  household  of  Aristo- 
bulus.'    This  Aristobulus  was  very  probably  the 

^  The  term  *  apostle'  is  also  used  in  2  Cor.  viii.  23,  Phil.  ii.  25, 
apparently  in  the  sense  of  messenger. 

*  Others,  including  Liddon,  would  translate  'highly  esteemed 
among,  i.  e.  ijv,  the  apostles '  but  this  is  not  probable. 


Personal  greetings  197 

grandson  of  Herod  the  Great,  who  lived  and 
died  at  Rome  in  a  private  station,  and  whose 
'  household  '  would  naturally  include  many  Jews 
and  orientals.  The  following  name  of  a  Jew 
suggests  connexion  with  the  Herods. 

5.  '  Rufus*  may  very  likely  be  the  son  of 
Simon  of  Cyrene,  whom  St.  Mark,  writing 
probably  at  Rome,  refers  to  as  well  known  \ 

6.  *  A  holy  kiss.'  '  It  was  from  this  and 
similar  words/  says  Origen,  'that  it  has  been 
handed  down  as  a  custom  in  the  Church  that 
after  the  prayer  the  brethren  should  welcome 
one  another  with  a  kiss.'  He  goes  on  to  urge 
that  this  ritual  kiss  should  be  neither  unchaste 
nor  without  real  feeling. 

7.  'All  the  churches  of  Christ  salute  you.' 
This  unique  phrase  is  probabl}^  used,  as 
Dr.  Hort  suggests,  to  express  how  '  the  church 
of  Rome  was  an  object  of  love  and  respect  to 
Jewish  and  Gentile  churches  alike.' 

'  Mark  xv.  21. 


198        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


DIVISION  VI.  §  4.    Chapter  XVI.  17-20. 

Final  warning. 

Something  occurred  before  the  letter  to  the 
Romans  was  concluded  and  dispatched  to  make 
St.  Paul  insert  a  final  warning  against  false 
teachers,  who  were  causing  divisions  and  per- 
verting the  gospel  as  all  Christians  had  at  first 
received  it,  in  the  interests  of  their  personal 
aggrandizement.  St.  Paul  makes  a  brief  but 
vigorous  appeal  to  the  Romans  to  be  true  to 
their  first  obedience,  and  maintain  their  reputa- 
tion unsullied. 

Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  mark  them  which  are 
causing  the  divisions  and  occasions  of  stumbHng,  contrary 
to  the  doctrine  which  ye  learned  :  and  turn  away  from 
them.  For  they  that  are  such  serve  not  our  Lord  Christ, 
but  their  own  belly ;  and  by  their  smooth  and  fair  speech 
they  beguile  the  hearts  of  the  innocent.  For  your  obedi- 
ence is  come  abroad  unto  all  men.  I  rejoice  therefore 
over  you  :  but  I  would  have  you  wise  unto  that  which  is 
good,  and  simple  unto  that  which  is  evil.  And  the  God  of 
peace  shall  bruise  Satan  under  your  feet  shortly. 

The  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  with  you. 


Final  warning  199 

This  abrupt  insertion  strongly  reminds  us  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  (see  i.  7-9,  vi.  13), 
and  of  the  similar  outburst  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Philippians  (iii.  1-3).  St.  Paul  believed  that  such 
Judaizing  teaching  was  inconsistent  with  the 
fundamental  Christian  '  tradition/  He  does  not 
imply  that  Rome  was  already  corrupted,  but  he 
scents  danger. 


200        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


DIVISION  VI.  §  5.    Chapter  XVI.  21-23. 

Salutations  from  St.  Paul's  companions. 

Timothy  my  fellow-worker  saluteth  you  ;  and  Lucius 
and  Jason  and  Sosipater,  my  kinsmen.  I  Tertius,  who 
write  the  epistle,  salute  you  in  the  Lord.  Gains  my  host, 
and  of  the  whole  church,  saluteth  you.  Erastus  the  trea- 
surer of  the  city  saluteth  you,  and  Quartus  the  brother. 

Most  of  these  persons  are  very  probably 
otherwise  known  to  us.  Leaving  aside  the 
well-known  Timothy,  we  find  a  Lucius  of 
Cyrene  among  the  prophets  in  Acts  xiii.  i  ^ ; 
a  Jason  at  Thessalonica,  as  St.  Paul's  host,  in 
Acts  xvii.  5ff;  a  Sopater  (or  Sosipater)  of 
Beroea,  Acts  xx.  4.  Gaius  was  one  of  the  few 
whom  St.  Paul  had  baptized  at  Corinth  (i  Cor. 
i.  14),  and  the  Christian  church,  it  appears,  met 
at  his  house.  Erastus,  the  treasurer  of  Corinth, 
is  probably  the  man  mentioned  in  2  Tim.  iv.  20. 

*  And  closely  associated  with  St.  Paul. 


Final  doxology  201 


DIVISION  VI.  §  6.    Chapter  XVI.  25-27. 

Final  Doxology. 

Now  to  him  that  is  able  to  stablish  you  according  to 
my  gospel  and  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ,  according 
to  the  revelation  of  the  mystery  which  hath  been  kept  in 
silence  through  times  eternal,  but  now  is  manifested,  and 
by  the  scriptures  of  the  prophets,  according  to  the  com- 
mandment of  the  eternal  God,  is  made  known  unto  all  the 
nations  unto  obedience  of  faith ;  to  the  only  wise  God, 
through  Jesus  Christ,  to  whom  ^  be  the  glory  for  ever. 
Amen. 

There  is  no  idea  in  this  doxology  with  which 
this  epistle  has  not  made  us  familiar  in  substance. 
We  have  been  led  to  think  of  the  gospel,  now 
proclaimed  and  entrusted  to  St.  Paul,  as  the 
disclosure  of  a  divine  purpose  long  working 
secretly:  we  have  been  bidden  to  adore  the 
unfathomable  resourcefulness  of  the  wisdom  of 
God  :  we  have  been  constantly  referred  to  the 

'  If  we  retain  the  words  '  to  whom '  the  grammar  of  the  sentence 
breaks  down,  but  the  object  to  whom  praise  is  ascribed  is  probably 
the  Father. 


202        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

testimony  borne  by  law  and  prophets  to  the 
gospels :  we  have  been  made  familiar  with  the 
object  of  the  evangelical  preaching,  as  being 
to  secure  '  the  obedience  of  faith  among  all  the 
nations/  And  a  particular  phrase  in  an  epistle 
written  about  the  same  time^ — 'We  speak  the 
wisdom  of  God  in  a  mystery,  even  the  wisdom 
that  hath  been  hidden,  which  God  foreordained 
before  the  worlds  unto  our  glory,  which  .  .  .  unto 
us  God  revealed  by  his  Spirit,' — is  strikingly 
parallel  to  the  beginning  of  the  doxology.  At 
the  same  time  the  elaborate  richness  of  the  style, 
as  well  as  many  of  the  ideas,  reminds  us  irresis- 
tibly of  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians^.  This, 
coupled  with  the  fact  that  there  is  considerable 
authority  for  placing  the  doxology  at  the  end  of 
chap,  xiv,  has  led  some  scholars  to  adopt  the 
idea— accepted  and  elaborated  by  Dr.  Lightfoot 
—that  St.  Paul  first  wrote  the  epistle  down  to 
xvi.  23,  as  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  subse- 
quently, perhaps  during  one  of  his  sojourns  at 
Rome,  turned  it  into  a  circular  letter,  omitting 
for  this  purpose  the  last  two  chapters,  with  their 
personal  matter,  and  adding  the   doxology  in 

*  I  Cor.  ii.  7,  10. 

"^  See  especially  Eph.  iii.  1-13.     Cf.  also  2  Tim.  i.  9-1 1 ;  Titus  i. 
2,  3. 


Final  doxology  203 

the  rich  manner  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians. 
Subsequently  the  doxology  would  have  been 
added  also  to  the  complete  epistle.  There  are 
many  difficulties  in  such  a  theory.  Especially 
why  should  the  beginning  of  chap,  xv  be  cut  off 
from  the  end  of  chap,  xiv,  when  there  is  no  break 
in  thought?  But  I  do  not  pursue  the  subject 
here  ^  for  it  would  be  out  of  place,  and  ahen  to 
our  practical  purpose.  There  is  no  ground  for 
doubting  that  the  whole  of  what  we  receive  as 
the  epistle  was  written  by  St.  Paul;  and  no 
ground  for  thinking  that  any  part  of  the  whole, 
down  to  xvi.  23,  was  not  found  in  the  letter  as 
originally  carried  by  Phoebe ;  but  it  cannot  be 
denied  that  some  mystery,  not  easily  solved, 
hangs  about  the  manifold  and  interrupted  con- 
clusions of  the  epistle ;  and  that  the  rich  style  of 
the  doxology  is  somewhat  unlike  both  the  rest 
of  the  epistle,  and  the  other  epistles  of  this 
period.  However,  whether  or  no  it  was  written 
at  a  later  date,  at  least  it  forms  a  splendid 
summing  up  of  what  is  probably  the  greatest 
and  most  influential  letter  ever  written. 
And  there  is   no  teaching  which  we   more 

'  It  is  fully  treated  in  Lightfoot's  Biblical  Essays  (Macmillan, 
1894),  pp.  287  ff,  by  Lightfoot  himself  and  Hort  from  different 
points  of  view,  and  by  5".  and  H.,  pp.  Ixxxv.  fif. 


204        ^^^  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

urgently  need  to-day  than  the  teaching  of  this 
epistle.  Whether  the  need  be  to  expand  our 
personal  religion  into  social  service,  add  also  to 
reinvigorate  our  social  service  with  the  power 
of  personal  religion ;  or  so  to  reassert  the  divine 
authority  of  the  Church  as  never  to  forget  that 
it  depends  for  its  vitality  upon  personally  con- 
verted hearts ;  or  to  teach  men  to  remember  the 
inexorable  severity  of  divine  judgement,  as  well 
as  the  depth  of  the  divine  compassion ;  or  to  re- 
buke the  shallowness  which  attempts  to  separate 
Christian  character  from  Christian  doctrine ;  or 
to  harmonize  individual  freedom  with  the  social 
claim  ;  or  to  impart  to  self-sacrifice  the  spirit  of 
humihty  and  gladness  and  indomitable  hope ; 
or  at  once  to  exalt  and  restrict  the  function  of 
the  State ;  or  to  emphasize  the  true  grounds 
and  Hmits  of  toleration  in  a  catholic  church — 
whatever,  one  may  almost  say,  be  the  need  to 
which  the  special  deficiencies  and  perils  of  our 
church  and  age  give  rise,  or  of  which  at  the 
moment  we  are  most  conscious,  the  teaching  of 
St.  Paul  in  this  epistle  is  found  to  meet  it  full  face. 
Truly  we  may  thank  God  with  a  continually 
growing  gratitude  for  the  gift  to  us  of  a  letter 
so  inexhaustibly  full  of  spiritual  wealth,  and  so 
complete  in  its  provision  for  the  whole  of  life. 


APPENDED    NOTES 

Note  A.     See  vol.  i.  p.  59. 
The  Meanings  of  the  Word  *  Faith.' 

The  history  of  the  original  Hebrew  and  Greek  words 
for  believing  or  faith,  is  very  interesting.  The  Hebrew 
verb  ('  aman ')  means  '  to  prop '  or  '  support '  ^  Now  (i) 
a  form  of  this  verb  means  '  to  be  supported,'  hence  *  to 
be  firm,'  hence  '  io  be  trushvorthy ' ;  (2)  another  form  of 
the  verb  means  'to  support  oneself  on,'  and  hence  '/o 
trust,^  '  to  believe.^  From  (i)  comes  the  Hebrew  substan- 
tive ('  emunah')  meaning  'faithfulness,'  'trustworthiness,' 
which  is  used,  as  elsewhere,  so  also  in  Habakkuk  ii.  4. 
In  that  passage  it  is  revealed  to  the  prophet,  that,  while 
the  apparently  overwhelming  wave  of  Chaldaean  bar- 
barism rolls  over  him  and  passes  away,  '  the  just  man 
shall  live  (or  save  his  life)  by  his  faithfulness.'  But  this 
faithfulness  of  the  righteous  Israelite  means  a  faithful 
holding  on  through  the  dark  days  to  the  word  of  God  as 
to  a  secure  ground  of  confidence  ;  and  thus  the  substantive 
used  in  this  place  in  the  Greek  Bible  ('pistis')  tends  to 
pass  into  the  meaning  which  it  mostly,  though  not 
always  ^  has  in  the  New  Testament— a  meaning  derived 

'  We  are  familiar  with  the  derived  adverb  of  confirmation, 
*  Amen.' 

^  In  Rom.  iii.  3,  Matt,  xxiii.  23,  it  is  still  used  for  *  faithfulness.' 


2o6        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

not  from  form  (i)  but  from  form  (2)  of  the  Hebrew  verb 
mentioned  above  (which  however  had  no  corresponding 
substantive)— trust  or  faith  in  the  word  and  promise  of 
another,  especially  God  or  Christ ;  or,  still  more  charac- 
teristically, trust  in  the  person  of  Christ  and  so  of  God. 

Even  under  this  heading  of  belief  or  trust  the  range 
of  the  word's  meaning  is  considerable.  In  one  passage 
of  St.  James'  Epistle  it  is  a  bare  intellectual  recognition 
of  the  truth  of  things,  without  any  moral  value  ('the 
devils  also  believe '  that  God  is  one,  James  ii.  19).  More 
often  it  is  that  confidence  in  the  divine  word  or  promise, 
by  which  the  good  man,  in  lack  of  present  evidence, 
sustains  his  courage  or  his  prayer  and  wins  his  victory 
over  the  world :  so  especially  in  Hebr.  xi,  Luke  xviii.  8, 
James  ii.  23,  2  Cor.  v.  7,  i  John  v.  4.  But  its  most 
characteristic  use,  as  said  above,  is  what  first  appears  in 
the  Gospels.  The  person  of  Jesus  is  there  represented 
as  eliciting  from  men  a  supreme  trust  in  His  power  to 
heal  diseases,  and  also  to  satisfy  that  deeper  human  need 
of  which  the  disease  is  an  outward  symbol.  And  this 
power  of  Jesus  to  heal  men  in  body  and  soul  is  seen  in  the 
Gospels  to  depend  upon  the  extent  of  their  faith :  '  Thy 
faith  hath  saved  thee  ; '  *  According  to  thy  faith  be  it  unto 
thee.'  Thus  Jesus  Christ  appears  constantly  as  inspiring, 
requiring,  and  rewarding  faith  in  Himself,  and  that  as 
the  manifested  Son  of  God,  e.g.  John  xiv.  i.  This  is 
'  the  faith  which  is  through  Him,'  i.e.  which  He  produces ; 
and  which  as  'faith  in  His  name'  remains  the  charac- 
teristic Christian  quality  when  He  is  gone  from  sight 
(Acts  iii.  16).  '  The  faith '  in  the  Acts  (vi.  7,  xiii.  8,  xiv.  22, 
&c.)  means  this  Christian  attitude  towards  the  unseen 
but  living  and  energizing  Christ. 

Thus  when  St.  Paul  came  to  believe  in  Jesus  Christ, 
'  faith  in  Jesus,' — as  meaning  not  merely  acceptance  of 
His  claim  or  of  His  word  or  of  His  grace,  but  whole- 


Note  B  207 


hearted  devotion  to  His  person,  entire  self-surrender  or 
self-committal  to  Christ  or  God  in  Christ— became  the 
dominant  note  of  his  new  state  :  '  I  know  him  whom  I 
have  believed,  and  I  am  persuaded  that  he  is  able  to  guard 
that  which  I  have  committed  unto  him  against  that  day '(2 
Tim.  i.  12  ^).  And  this  same  devotion  to  Christ  becomes,  in 
St.  Paul's  theology,  in  its  various  stages,  the  only  ground 
of  man's  acceptance  with  God.  And  though  he  uses 
*  faith '  in  a  morally  lower  sense,  as  distinct  from  love — 
the  faith  which  qualifies  for  miracles  (i  Cor.  xiii.  2) — 
yet  in  his  characteristic  sense  of  the  term  it  involves  the 
deepest  love  towards  its  divine  object  ^. 

Naturally,  as  faith  is  thus  the  characteristic  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  this  faith  in  a  person  involves  a  belief 
about  Him— His  divine  sonship,  His  resurrection,  His 
mission  of  the  Spirit— so  '■  the  faith '  comes  to  mean 
(objectively)  that  which  the  Christian  beheves,  or  his 
creed ;  and  this  sense  of  the  word  appears  almost  in  the 
Acts,  in  Gal.  i.  23,  and  in  Eph.  iv.  5,  and  certainly  in 
the  Pastoral  Epistles  frequently  (see  Dr.  Bernard  in  Camh. 
Gr.  Test  on  i  Tim.  i.  19)  and  St.  Jude's  Epistle,  verse  2. 


Note  B.     See  vol.  i.  p.  103. 
The  Use  of  the  Word  '  Conscience.' 

There  is  no  word  for  conscience  in  the  Old  Testament. 
'  The  conception,'  says  Delitzsch  {Bibl.  Psychology,  Clark's 

^  In  spite  of  Ellicott,  Holtzmann,  and  Bernard,  I  believe  this  to 
be  the  true  rendering,  and  not  that  of  the  R.V.  margin. 

2  On  the  development  of  the  principle  of  faith  in  the  soul,  see 
vol.  i.  pp.  29,  30  ;  and  on  its  naturalness,  in  the  highest  sense,  for 
man,  see  pp.  21,  22. 


2o8        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

trans.,  p.  i6o),  *  is  not  yet  impressed  upon  it.'  And  he 
accounts  for  this  by  quoting, '  The  positive  law  took  away 
its  significance  from  the  natural  moral  consciousness.' 
The  Jews,  that  is— like  other  nations  at  certain  stages 
of  their  history — lived  so  constantly  under  the  detailed 
guidance  of  a  law  believed  to  be  divine,  that  there 
was  not  much  room  for  reflection  as  to  the  right  and 
wrong  of  things.  For  the  idea  of  conscience  to  develop, 
the  will  of  God  must  be  less  clearly  and  decisively 
pronounced  as  to  the  details  of  conduct.  There  was, 
however,  of  course  among  the  Jews,  in  proportion  to 
their  belief  in  a  clear  divine  law,  the  consciousness  of 
having  done  wrong  ;  and  on  this  account  a  man's  '  heart ' 
is  described  as  '  privy  to  '  an  offence,  and  as  '  reproach- 
ing' or  'smiting'  him  :  see  i  Kings  ii.  44,  Job  xxvii.  6\ 
I  Sam.  xxiv.  5,  xxv.  31,  2  Sam.  xxiv.  10.  Here  is  the 
root  of  the  idea  of  conscience,  i.e.  of  something  in 
the  man  behind  his  surface  self,  reflecting  upon  what 
he  has  done,  a  self  behind  himself  acquitting  or  con- 
demning him,  and  so  anticipating  the  divine  judgement. 
For,  as  stated  above  ^  this  was  in  the  main  the  Stoic  doc- 
trine of  conscience,  and  it  was  among  them  that  the  idea 
was  first  developed.  Conscience  was  conceived  of  as  that 
in  man  which  lay  behind  his  working  self  and  reflected 
on  his  actions  after  they  were  done,  bringing  them  into 
the  light  of  the  *  law  of  nature '  or  universal  divine  law 
for  man.  There  is  thus,  as  it  were,  in  each  man  a 
double  self,  or  double  consciousness  {conscientia),  so 
that  one  can  reflect  upon  himself,  and  pass  judgement 
on  his  own  actions. 

It  is  in  this  sense  of  a  self-judging  faculty  in  all  men 
reflecting  on  what  they  have  done,  anticipating  a  divine 

^  In  LXX  ov  yap  ovvoida  e/xavToi  arona  npd^as. 
2  Vol.  i.  p.  103,  n.  2. 


Note  B  209 


judgement,  that  the  idea  of  conscience  was  accHmatized 
among  the  Jews.  Thus,  in  Wisdom  xvii.  11,  we  read, 
'  For  wickedness,  condemned  by  a  witness  within,  is  a 
coward  thing,  and  being  pressed  hard  by  conscience, 
alwa3's  forecasteth  the  worst  lot.'  In  St.  John  viii.  9, 
according  to  one  reading,  the  Jews  are  '  convicted  by 
their  own  conscience.'  So  St.  Paul,  in  the  passage 
discussed  above  (ii.  15),  seems  to  distinguish  the  sub- 
sequent reflective  'conscience  '  from  the  previous  inform- 
ing reason,  'the  effect  (equivalent)  of  the  law  written 
in  their  hearts.'  And  in  most  of  the  passages  of  the 
New  Testament,  this  meaning  of  conscience — the  faculty 
by  which  we  sit  in  judgement  on  what  we  have  already 
done— is  sufficient.  But  sometimes,  as  also  among  the 
Stoics  ^,  the  word  passes  into  meaning  the  positive 
directing  faculty,  as  when  (i  Cor.  viii.  10)  a  man's 
'  conscience'  is  said  to  be  'emboldened'  to  adopt  a  new 
practice,  or  (Hebr.  ix.  14)  to  be  cleansed  for  positive 
service.  Moreover,  though  it  is  an  individual  faculty 
(see  Rom.  ii.  15),  and  exists  primarily  to  pass  judgement 
on  one's  own  actions  only,  yet  perforce  it  must  also  look 
w^ithout  and  condemn  or  approve  the  actions  of  others 
(2  Cor.  iv.  2,  V.  11). 

St.  Paul  also  brings  into  notice  that  our  conscience  is 
a  faculty  for  the  condition  of  which  we  are  responsible. 
It  is  not  the  voice  of  God,  but  a  faculty  capable  of  reflect- 
ing His  voice,  if  it  be  well  guarded.  Thus  you  may  have 
a  '  weak '  or  a  '  strong,'  i.  e.  a  more  or  less  enlightened, 
conscience  (i  Cor.  viii).  And  a  man  may  'defile'  his 
'  mind  and  conscience,'  i.  e.  he  may  corrupt  his  moral 
reason  and  powers  of  moral  self- judgement  (Tit.  i.  15). 

^  e.  g.  when   conscience  was   described   by   Epictetus   as   the 
grown  man's  inward  tutor  [pedagogue],  which   must   obviously 
mean  that  it  is  to  instruct  as  well  as  reprove. 
II.  P 


2IO        The  Epistle  to  the  Romany 

Then  the  '  conscience '  may  become  hardened  and 
'  seared'  (i  Tim.  iv.  2),  so  that  *  the  light  that  is  in  '  men 
becomes  itself  *  darkness '  according  to  our  Lord's 
warning  (St.  Matt.  vi.  23).  And  there  is  nothing  which 
is  more  necessary  at  the  present  day  than  to  remind  men 
that  they  are  not  *  safe '  because  they  are  not  acting 
against  their  conscience,  unless  they  are  also  constantly 
at  pains  to  enlighten  their  conscience  and  keep  it  in  the 
light,  by  the  help  of  the  best  moral  thought  of  their  time, 
the  guidance  of  the  Church  and  the  word  of  God.  Our 
conscience,  if  it  is  rightly  to  reassure  us  by  its  witness, 
must,  Hke  St.  Paul's  conscience,  bear  its  witness  '  in  the 
Holy  Ghost '  (Rom.  ix.  i). 

With  us  moderns  '  conscience  '  has  generally  the  wider 
meaning  of  the  whole  practical  moral  consciousness.  It 
enjoins  as  well  as  judges,  and  is  occupied  with  the 
present  and  the  future,  as  well  as  with  the  past. 


Note  C.     See  vol.  i.  p.  129. 

Recent  Reactions  from  the  Teaching  about  Hell. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  there  has  been  within  the  last 
forty  years  a  great,  and  in  large  measure  legitimate, 
reaction  from  the  old— mediaeval  and  Calvinist — teaching 
about  hell.  But  one  who  reads  the  early  chapters  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  or  the  Gospels,  or  other  parts  of 
the  New  Testament,  in  view  of  this  reaction,  will  probably 
feel  an  uncomfortable  sense  that  it  has  gone  too  far.  It  is 
worth  while  then  to  try  and  discriminate. 

To  put  the  matter  in  as  brief  a  summary  as  befits 
a  note,  I  should  hold  that  the  reaction  has  been  legitimate 
so  far  as  it  has  involved  a  repudiation  of — 


Note  C  2IT 


(i)  the  Calvinist  doctrine  that  God  has  created  some 
men,  no  matter  whether  many  or  few,  inevitably  doomed 
to  everlasting  misery.  This  doctrine  is  flat  contrary  to 
some  particular  statements  of  the  New  Testament  (as  to 
its  general  spirit)  and  is  only  a  misunderstanding  of  others 
(see  above,  pp.  8,  29). 

(2)  any  such  crude  idea  of  the  divine  judgement  as 
that  God  condemns  men  for  merely  external  reasons, 
e.g.  because  in  fact,  apart  from  any  question  of  will,  they 
were  not  baptized,  or  remained  pagans  or  heretics.  Such 
a  conception  is  quite  inadequate,  for  the  divine  judgement 
penetrates  to  the  heart.  God  is  a  father :  He  is  absolutely 
equitable  :  He  judges  men  in  the  light  of  their  opportuni- 
ties. He  will  reject  none  whose  will  is  not  set  to  evil. 
*  This  is  the  judgement  that  .  .  .  men  loved  the  darkness 
rather  than  the  light,  for  their  works  were  evil '  (John  iii. 

19). 

(3)  the  tendency  to  exaggerate  what  is  revealed  to  us, 
and  what,  therefore,  we  can  say  we  know  about  the  state 
of  man  after  death.  Thus  [a)  there  is  nothing  really 
revealed  to  us  as  to  the  relative  proportions  of  saved  and 
lost,  {b)  It  is  certain  that  we  only  know  of  a  probation 
for  man  here  and  now—'  Now  is  the  accepted  time— now 
is  the  day  of  salvation.'  And  the  absolutely  equitable 
Father  may  see  the  conditions  of  an  adequate  probation 
equally  in  every  man's  earthly  lot.  It  is  therefore  foolish 
to  entertain,  or  encourage  any  one  else  to  entertain,  an 
expectation  of  any  other  state  of  probation  except  that 
which  we  certainly  have  here  in  this  world.  *  It  is 
appointed  unto  men  once  to  die,  and  after  that  the  judge- 
ment.' But  if  St.  Peter  could  speak  (as  of  a  familiar 
subject)  of  the  '  gospel '  as  having  been  '  preached  '  by  our 
Lord's  human  spirit  in  Hades  '  to  the  dead,'  i.e.  to  those 
who  had  perished  in  their  wickedness  under  the  divine 
judgement  of  the  flood  :  and  preached  with  the  intention 

P  2 


212        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

that  the  judgement  might  be  turned  into  a  blessing  and 
means  of  spiritual  life— and  he  certainly  does  speak  thus 
(i  Peter  iv.  6,  cf.  hi.  19) :  I  do  not  see  how  we  can  deny  the 
possibihty  at  any  period,  or  in  the  case  of  any  person,  of 
an  unfulfilled  probation  being  accomplished  beyond  death. 
(c)  Careful  attention  to  the  origin  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
necessary  immortality  or  indestructibiHty  of  each  human 
soul,  as  stated  for  instance  by  Augustine  and  Aquinas  \ 
will  probably  convince  us  that  it  was  no  part  of  the 
original  Christian  message,  or  of  really  catholic  doctrine  ^. 
It  was  rather  a  speculation  of  Platonism  taking  possession 
of  the  Church.  And  this  consideration  leaves  open  possi- 
biHties  of  the  ultimate  extinction  of  personal  conscious- 
ness in  the  lost,  which  Augustinianism  somewhat  rudely 
closed. 

But  to  have  convicted  our  forefathers  of  going,  in  cer- 
tain parts  of  their  teaching,  beyond  what  was  certainly 
revealed,  affords  no  justification  for  doing  the  same  our- 
selves in  an  opposite  extreme  ;  by  asserting  for  example 
positively  (a)  that  almost  all  men  will  be  '  saved ' ;  or  (b) 
that  there  is  probation  to  be  looked  for  beyond  death  ; 
or  (c)  that  the  souls  of  '  the  lost '  will  be  at  the  last 
extinguished.  These  positive  positions  are  no  more 
justified  than  those  of  our  forefathers  which  we  have 
deprecated.  We  must  recognize  the  limits  of  positive 
knowledge. 

And  when  we  have  come  to  the  end  of  what  a  legitimate 
reaction  from  the  teaching  of  our  forefathers  restores  to 
us,  in  the  direction  of  a  '  larger  hope,'  we  are  still  face  to 

*  Summa,  pars,  i,  qu.  75,  art.  6,  *  Respondeo  dicendutn,  quod 
necesse  est  dicere,  animam  humanam,  quam  dicimus  intellectivum 
principium,  esse  incorruptibilem.' 

^  See  Dr.  Agar  Beet's  Last  Things  (Hodder  and  Stoughton, 
1898^  pp.  194  ff,  and  Gladstone's  Studies  Subsidiary  to  Butler 
(Oxford,  1896),  part  ii.  pp.  260  ff. 


Note  C  213 


face  with  the  fact  of  '  eternal  judgement.'  Men,  as  far  as 
their  individual  destinies  are  concerned,  are  passing 
towards  one  of  two  ends,  not  towards  one  only — a  divine 
judgement  of  approval  or  of  condemnation  ;  and  both 
judgements  are  represented  as  final  and  irreversible  ;  and 
they  are  the  inevitable  outcome  of  the  moral  law  by  which 
our  probation  is  realized— that  voluntary  acts  form  habits, 
and  habits  stereotype  into  a  fixed  character.  It  is  foolish 
to  look  to  the  process  or  moment  of  death  for  redemption 
from  sin  ;  for  death,  as  far  as  we  know,  only  transplants 
us  with  the  character  we  have  made  for  ourselves,  and 
with  continuous  consciousness,  into  the  unknown  world  ; 
so  that  if  in  this  life  we  have  unfitted  ourselves  for  God, 
we  must  find  it  out  beyond  death,  and  know  there  the  full 
meaning  of  our  awful  miscalculation  here.  And  the 
awakening  of  the  *  lost '  to  what  they  have  cast  away — 
to  the  meaning  of  irreversible  self-exclusion  from  the 
presence  of  God— is  imaged  as  unspeakably  awful ;  and 
their  state  is  pictured  in  metaphors  and  phrases  descrip- 
tive both  of  torment  and  finality — 'outer  darkness,'  'gnaw- 
ing worm,'  '  unquenchable  fire,'  *  eternal  punishment,' 
'  eternal  sin,'  '  sin  which  shall  not  be  forgiven,  neither  in 
this  world,  nor  in  that  which  is  to  come,'  eternal  *  death,' 
or  exclusion  from  eternal  life,  '  eternal  ruin,'  '  wrath  and 
indignation,  tribulation  and  anguish.' 

In  face  of  all  these  sayings,  it  seems  to  me  indisputable 
that  'universahsm'— the  teaching  that  there  are  to  be 
none  finally  lost— is  an  instance  of  wilfulness.  To  speak 
of  that  which  lies  beyond  death,  even  in  the  case  of  the 
worst  and  most  impenitent  criminal,  as  a  place 

'  Where  God  unmakes  but  to  remake  the  soul 
He  else  made  first  in  vain — which  must  not  be,' 

is,  I  cannot  but  feel,  in  flat  contradiction  to  the  whole 
tone  of  the  New  Testament. 


214        ^^^  Epistle  io  the  Romans 

It  is  no  doubt  true  that  there  is  in  the  New  Testament 
an  expectation  of  a  final  unity  of  the  whole  universe  in 
God,  and  that  we  find  it  hard  to  conceive  the  relation  of 
lost  souls  in  hell  to  this  final  unity.  Certainly  all  legiti- 
mate avenues  of  dim  conjecture  that  a  very  limited 
revelation  allows  to  be  kept  open,  ought  to  be  kept  open. 
Certainly  we  know  in  part— the  partialness  of  our 
knowledge  can  hardly  be  exaggerated.  But  we  must  be 
true  to  both  elements  in  what  is  disclosed  to  us  ;  and 
Dr.  Martineau  has  reminded  us^  how  deeply  'the  belief  in 
a  separate  heaven  and  hell,  and  a  corresponding  distribu- 
tion of  men  into  only  two  classes  of  good  and  bad,  friends 
and  enemies  of  God,'  though  *  at  first  sight  nothing  can 
appear  more  unnatural  and  defiant  of  all  fact,'  is  yet 
bound  up  with  '  the  inward  look '  of  moral  evil  and  the 
fundamental  reality  of  moral  choice.  In  fact  it  seems  to 
be  true  to  say  that  a  really  Christian  Theism,  and  a  reall}'- 
Christian  doctrine  of  human  freedom,  are  inseparable 
from  the  belief  in  the  possibility  of  wilful  sin  leading  to 
final  ruin. 

'  It  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die,  and  after  that  the 
judgement';  and  this  judgement  in  the  case  of  those  of 
us  who  have  wilfully  hardened  themselves,  or  remained 
loveless  and  love-rejecters,  in  face  of  the  real  offer  of 
God  to  man  in  Christ  Jesus,  is  a  divine  condemnation 
which  takes  effect  in  an  eternal  punishment,  the  bitter- 
ness as  well  as  the  justice  of  which  the  soul  realizes,  and 
which— if  it  does  not  necessarily  mean  an  everlasting 
continuance  of  personal  consciousness — is  yet  final  and 
irreversible,  and  unspeakably  awful  2. 

^  See  Types  of  Ethical  Theory  (Oxford,  1885),  ii.  pp.  60  ff. 

^  The  only  passage  in  the  New  Testament  which  strongly 
suggests  an  everlasting  persistence  of  personal  consciousness  of 
pain,  is  Rev.  xx.  10,  '  Shall  be  tormented  day  and  night  for  ever 
and  ever.'     This  is  explicit  enough.     But  I  am  persuaded  that  all 


Note  D  215 


Note  D.     See  vol.  i.  pp.  143  ff. 
Difficulties  about  the  Doctrine  of  the  Atonement. 

I  have  endeavoured  above  to  sketch  the  positive  con- 
ception of  the  Atonement,  as  St.  Paul  seems  to  put  it 
before  us.  Christ  inaugurates  the  church  of  the  new 
covenant,  the  new  life  of  union  with  God.  He  lays  its 
basis  in  a  great  act  of  reparation  to  the  righteousness  of 
God,  which  'the  old  Adam'  had  continually  outraged. 
This  act  of  reparation  lies  in  a  moral  sacrifice  of  obedience, 
carried  to  the  extreme  point  by  the  shedding  of  His  blood. 
This  is  the  great  propitiation  in  virtue  of  which  God  is 
enabled,  without  moral  misunderstanding,  to  forgive 
freely  the  sins  of  any  one  who  comes  in  faith  to  unite 
himself  to  Christ,  and  set  him  free  to  begin  the  new  life. 

The  subject  is  a  divine  'mystery,'  and  we  shall  never 
adequately  probe  it.  Nay  more,  one  man's  thought  will 
rightly  seem  inadequate  to  another,  who  has  gained,  or 
thinks  he  has  gained,  some  special  avenue  of  insight  into 

the  numbers  and  expressions  for  periods  of  time  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse are  strictly  symbolical.  '  A  thousand  years,'  '  forty  and 
two  months,*  '■  three  da3^s  and  a  half,'  '  day  and  night  for  ever  and 
ever,'  are  expressions  which  have  to  be  translated  into  some  moral 
equivalent  before  they  can  be  made  the  basis  of  literal  teaching. 
Thus  '  day  and  night  for  ever  and  ever '  describes  in  a  picture  the 
completeness  of  the  final  overthrow  and  the  anguish  of  the  enemies 
of  the  Lamb.  The  symbolical  character  of  the  expression  is  further 
indicated  by  '  the  beast '  and  '  the  false  prophet' — themselves  sym- 
bolical figures— being  with  the  devil  the  subjects  of  the  torment. 

Some  will  say  that  the  deterrent  effect  of  the  doctrine  of  hell 
depends  upon  its  being  held  to  be  a  state  of  strictly  endless  con- 
scious torment.  I  do  not  believe  this  is  the  case.  The  language 
of  the  New  Testament  is  full  enough  of  deterrent  horror  if  we  are 
faithful  to  it.     And  after  all,  this  is  all  we  have  a  right  to  be. 


2i6        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

the  divine  depths.  But  when  we  pass  from  special  points 
of  view,  which  are  necessarily  more  or  less  individual,  and 
can  never  become  certainties  for  men  in  general — when  we 
pass  on  to  the  ground  of  what  should  be  the  common 
church  belief,  the  statement  of  the  original  revelation,  it 
is  not,  it  seems  to  me,  liable  to  any  of  the  familiar  moral 
objections,  or  indeed  a  subject  of  any  special  difficulty. 
The  difficulties  experienced  by  the  moral  consciousness  of 
our  age  have  been  due  to  gross  and  unnecessary  mis- 
understandings, of  which  the  following  are,  perhaps,  the 
most  considerable. 

(i)  The  propitiation  has  become  separated  from  the 
new  life,  for  which  it  merely  prepares  the  way.  It  has 
been  elevated,  with  disastrous  moral  results,  from  a  means 
to  an  end.  Christ's  work  for  us  has  been  treated  apart 
from  His  work  m  us,  in  which  alone  it  is  realized.  He 
alone  can  act /^r  all  men,  because  He  only  can  be  their 
new  life  within.  But  on  this  see  vol.  i.  pp.  141  f,  and 
Ephes.  pp.  54  ff. 

(2)  The  idea  of  injustice  has  been  introduced  into  the 
'  transaction '  of  the  Atonement,  and  has  been  the  most 
fruitful  source  of  difficulty ;— but  quite  unnecessarily. 
There  is  a  story  that  when  Edward  VI  was  a  child,  and 
deserved  punishment,  another  boy  was  taken  and  whipped 
in  his  place.  This  monstrously  unjust  transaction  has 
been  taken  by  Christian  teachers  as  an  illustration  of  the 
Atonement ;  and  it  is  truly  an  illustration  of  the  Atone- 
ment as  they  misconceived  it.  But  the  misconception  is 
gratuitous  :  there  is  no  real  resemblance  in  the  two  cases. 
For  first,  what  is  represented  to  us  in  the  New  Testament 
is  not  that  Jesus  Christ,  an  innocent  person,  was  punished, 
without  reference  to  His  own  will,  by  a  God  who  thus 
showed  Himself  indifferent  as  to  whom  He  punished  so 
long  as  some  one  suffered.  But  He,  being  Himself  very 
God,  the   Son   of  the  Father,  the  administrator  of  the 


Note  D 


Zl'] 


moral  law  and  judge  of  the  world,  of  His  own  will 
became  man,  and  suffered  what  the  sin  of  the  world 
laid  upon  Him,  in  order  that  He  might  lift  the  world  out 
of  sin.  Voluntary  self-sacrifice  for  others  is  at  least  not 
to  be  described  as  injustice.  At  least  we  rejoice  to 
recognize  that  God  accepts  such  self-sacrifice.  It  is  to 
vicarious  self-sacrifice  Like  our  Lord's  that  the  human 
race  owes  the  greater  part  of  whatever  moral  progress 
it  has  hitherto  made. 

Secondly,  God  is  not  represented  as  imposing  any 
specially  devised  punishment  on  His  only  Son  in  our 
nature.  As  the  matter  is  stated  in  the  New  Testament, 
He  required  of  Him  obedience,  the  obedience  proper  to 
man  ;  and,  if  we  regard  sympathy  with  our  fellow  men  as 
a  part  of  our  duty  to  God,  we  may  say  obedience  only. 
Thus,  '  Lo,  I  come  to  do  thy  will,  O  God '  is  the  one  cry 
of  the  Christ.  In  His  simple  acceptance  of  the  whole  of 
human  duty  lies  the  moral  essence  and  value  of  His 
sacrifice.  All  the  physical  and  mental  sufferings  of  Christ 
came  out  of  His  fulfilment  of  the  human  ideal,  God  ward 
and  manward,  and  were  involved  in  it.  He  died  because 
obedience  to  the  terms  of  His  mission — 'the  word  of 
truth,  and  meekness,  and  righteousness' — in  a  world 
of  sin  such  as  this  is,  involved  dying.  '  He  was  obedient ' 
without  reserve — 'unto  death,  even  the  death  of  the 
cross  ^.'  The  value  of  the  bloodshedding  lies  in  this, 
so  far  as  Scripture  enables  us  to  judge — that  it  repre- 
sents utter  obedience  under  conditions  which  human 
sin,  the  sin  of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  laid  upon  Him :  and 
it  was  in  this  sense,  which  does  not  leave  out  of  con- 
sideration the  mental  torment  caused  to  His  sinless  spirit 
by  contact  with  sin  ^  that  He  *  bare  our  sins  in  his  body 

1  Phil.  ii.  8 ;  Hebr.  x.  5-9. 

^  The  perfect  Man  perfectly  realized  the  misery  and  horror  of 


2i8        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

on  the  tree,'  and  that  'the  Lord  made  to  hght  on  him  the 
iniquity  of  us  all.'  What  is  ascribed  to  the  Father  is  that 
He  'spared  not'  His  only  Son  by  miraculously  exempting 
Him  from  the  consequences  of  His  mission  ;  and  that  He 
foresaw,  overruled,  and  used  for  His  own  wise  and  loving 
purposes  the  sin  of  men  \ 

Thirdly  and  lastly,  the  Christ  (as  represented  in  the 
New  Testament)  did  not  suffer  in  order  that  we  might  be 
let  off  the  punishment  for  our  own  sins,  but  in  order 
to  bring  us  to  God.  '  By  his  stripes  we  are ' — not  excused 
punishment,  but—'  healed.'  In  fact,  there  are  two  dis- 
tinguishable punishments  for  sin.  There  is  the  spiritual 
punishment,  which  is  involved  in  being  morally  ahenated 
from  God,  which  may  become  irreversible  and  eternal, 
but  which  is  gone  when  the  moral  alienation  is  gone. 
From  this  Christ  delivers  us  in  making  us  at  one  again 
with  the  Father,  but  He  Himself  did  not  endure  it.  God 
forbid  that  we  should  imagine  such  a  thing!  Besides 
this  there  is  the  temporal  penalty  which  our  sins  bring 
as  inevitable  consequences  upon  ourselves  and  upon  the 
race.  All  these  consequences  of  human  sin  the  sinless 
Christ  bore  for   us,   but  not  that  we  might  be  let  off 

the  sins  on  behalf  of  which  He  suflfered.  How  much  is  involved 
in  this  in  the  way  of  detailed  realization  of  each  individual  sin  of 
each  individual  sinner,  is  a  matter  on  which  we  have  no  clear 
grounds  for  exact  statement. 

^  I  believe  that  nothing  more  than  this  is  really  suggested  by 
Scripture.  The  phrase,  '  made  stn  for  us  '  (2  Cor.  v.  21),  means, 
I  believe,  according  to  the  clear  use  of  the  word  in  the  LXX, 
'made  a  sin-offenng  for  us.'  The  same  words  in  the  Hebrew 
stand  for  sin  and  sin-offering,  and  the  use  of  the  Greek  follov/s  : 
see  especially  (in  LXX)  Lev.  iv.  21,  'It  is  the  sin  (=  sin-offer- 
ing) of  the  assembly' ; '  24,  *  It  (the  goat)  is  a  sin  ; '  29,  '  He 
shall  lay  his  hand  upon  the  head  of  the  sin  ; '  vi.  25,  '■  This  is  the 
law  of  the  sin ' ;  viii.  14,  '  The  bullock  of  the  sin.'  Cf.  Hos. 
iv.  8,  &c. 


Note  E  219 


bearing  them.  We  must  bear  them  too— both  the  death 
of  the  body  and  the  chastisement  of  particular  sins. 
Christ  bore  the  punishment  of  sins  that  were  not  His 
own,  in  order  that  in  our  case  the  punishments  of  sins 
which  are  our  own  might,  through  His  bringing  us  back 
to  God,  be  converted  into  heahng  chastisements  and 
gracious  penances.  The  record  of  God's  deaUngs  with 
His  saints  is  still,  as  in  Ps.  xcix.  8,  that  they  are  heard, 
forgiven  and  punished. 

How  gratuitously  then  the  idea  of  injustice  has  been 
introduced  into  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  sacrifice  for  us 
becomes  evident  when  once  it  is  brought  within  the 
scriptural  limits.  Christ  suffered  voluntarily.  He  suf- 
fered simply  what  was  involved  in  becoming  man  in 
a  world  of  sin.  He  suffered,  the  righteous  for  the  un- 
righteous, that  He  might  bring  us  back  to  God,  that  so 
we  might  have  grace  to  bear  our  own  sufferings  and  share 
His. 

This  alone,  it  seems  to  me,  is  what  the  New  Testament 
certainly  teaches.  And  the  matter  of  most  importance  is 
that,  ridding  our  minds  of  distracting  and  often  needless 
difficulties,  we  should  drink  in,  with  heart  and  intelHgence 
alike,  the  full  force  of  what  is  certainly  part  of  the  Gospel 
—the  doctrine  of  the  one,  full,  perfect,  and  sufficient 
atonement  with  the  Father,  won  for  us  by  the  self-sacrifice 
of  the  Christ. 


Note  E.    See  vol.  i.  p.  196. 

Evolution  and  the  Christian  Doctrine  of  the  Fall. 

There  is   a  wide-spread    and    popular   notion   that   a 
marked  contradiction  exists  between  the  biological  theory 


220        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

of  evolution  and  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Fall,  which 
may  be  stated  and  examined  under  several  heads  :  — 

I. — '  According  to  the  theory  of  evolution  man  began 
his  career  at  the  bottom,  emerging  from  purely  animal 
life,  and  slowly  struggled  upwards  to  his  present  level  of 
attainment.  According  to  the  Christian  doctrine,  on  the 
contrary,  he  was  created  perfect,  and  then  subsequently 
fell  into  sin  and  accompanying  misery.  Thus,  according 
to  one  theory,  man  began  at  the  bottom  ;  according  to  the 
other,  he  began  at  the  top.' 

Now  there  is  no  doubt  that  when  so  stated  the 
evidence  is  all  in  favour  of  the  scientific  point  of  view,  and 
against  the  Christian.  But  such  a  contrast  requires  the 
greatest  modification  on  both  sides  before  it  can  be  taken 
as  truly  representing  the  facts.  Thus,  it  is  not  the  case 
that  the  Bible  suggests  that  man  was  created  perfect,  i.  e. 
perfectly  developed,  and  that  his  later  course  has  been 
simply  the  effect  of  the  Fall,  i.  e.  a  downward  course. 
Leaving  first  out  of  account  Gen.  i-iii,  we  notice  that  the 
Bible  is  conspicuously,  and  in  marked  contrast  to  the 
religious  books  of  other  nations,  the  book  of  development. 
It  looks  continuously  and  systematically  forward,  not 
backward,  for  the  perfecting  of  man.  It  traces  the  be- 
ginning of  civihzation  in  Abel,  the  keeper  of  sheep,  Cain, 
the  tiller  of  the  ground,  in  Jabal,  '  the  father  of  such  as 
dwell  in  tents  and  have  cattle,'  in  Jubal,  the  father  of 
music,  '  of  all  such  as  handle  the  harp  and  pipe,'  in  Tubal 
Cain,  the  first  forger  of  brass  and  iron  work ;  it  indicates 
the  origin  of  rehgious  worship  (in  some  sense)  at  the  time 
of  Enoch,  and  the  origin  of  building  with  the  tower  of 
Babel.  The  names  of  Noah,  Abraham,  Moses,  Samuel, 
David,  &c.,  represent  stages  of  advance  along  the  line  of 
a  chosen  people ;  and  later  on  it  appears  also  that  upon 
the  chosen  people  centres  a  hope  for  all  nations,  and  a 
purpose  is  discovered  in  universal  history.    The  special 


Note  E  221 


intellectual  qualities  of  various  races  or  civilizations,  as  of 
Egypt  and  Tyre,  are  recognized  by  some  of  the  prophets, 
and  recognized  as  part  of  a  divine  purpose  for  the  world  \ 
The  Bible  then  is  the  book  of  development ;  it  looks 
forward,  not  backward.  But  it  is  also  true  that  all  this 
development  is  represented  as  having  been  (we  may  say) 
a  second-best  thing.  It  has  not  been  according  to  God's 
first  purpose.  There  has  been  a  great  and  continual 
hindrance,  which  has  consisted  in  a  persistent  rebellion 
or  sin  on  man's  part  against  God  ;  and  this  again  has  had 
its  root  in  a  certain  perversion  of  the  heart  of  mankind 
which  is  regarded  as  approximately  universal.  If  we  now 
take  into  account  again  the  first  three  chapters  of  Genesis 
(which,  however,  have  left  much  less  trace  than  is  com- 
monly supposed  in  the  Old  Testament  as  a  whole^)  we  find 
that  they  describe  an  original  act  of  rebellion  on  the  part 
of  the  first  human  pair,  which  is  there  spoken  of  as  at 
least  entailing  external  consequences  of  a  penal  sort  upon 
their  descendants — that  is  death,  pain,  and  the  loss  of 
Paradise  ;  and  that  later,  especially  in  the  teaching  of  St. 
Paul,  the  universal  moral  flaw  in  human  nature  (original 
sin)  is  also  represented  as  having  its  source  in  this  initial 
act  of  rebellion. 

Sin  is  therefore,  according  to  our  Christian  scriptures, 
something  unnatural  to  man  :  the  violation  of  his  nature  by 
his  rebeUion  ;  and  it  is  a  continual  element  of  deteriora- 
tion. But  the  idea  that  man  was  created  perfect,  i.  e.  so 
as  not  to  need  development,  is  not  suggested.  No  doubt 
theologians,  from  the  age  of  Augustine  down  to  recent 
times,  have  done  something  more  than  suggest  it.  Thus 
Robert  South  supposes  that  'an  Aristotle  was  but  the 
rubbish  of  an  Adam,  and  Athens  but  the  rudiments  of 
Paradise ' ;  and  Milton  implanted  the  idea  in  the  imagina- 

^  See  especially  Ezekiel  xxviii,  xxxi.  ^  See  vol.  i.  p.  193. 


222       The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

tion  of  Englishmen  ;  but  it  is  in  no  way  suggested  by  the 
Bible,  and  was  expressly  repudiated  by  the  earliest 
Christian  theologians  in  east  and  west.  Thus,  in  answer 
to  the  question  whether  Adam  was  formed  perfect  or 
imperfect,  Clement  of  Alexandria  replied,  'They  shall 
learn  from  us  that  he  was  not  perfect  in  respect  of  his 
creation,  but  in  a  fit  condition  to  receive  virtue/  And 
Irenaeus  says  that  it  was  in  the  power  of  God  to  make 
men  perfect  from  the  beginning,  but  that  such  an  initial 
perfection  would  be  contrary  to  the  law  of  human  nature, 
which  is  the  law  of  gradual  growth  \  We  must  therefore 
modify  the  statement  of  Christian  doctrine  from  which 
we  started,  thus  : — Man  has  been  slowly  led,  or  has  slowly 
developed,  towards  the  divine  ideal  of  his  Creator ;  but  his 
actual  development  has  been  much  less  rapid  and  constant 
than  it  might  have  been,  owing  to  the  fact  of  sin  from  ivhich 
he  might  have  been  free. 

Now,  can  it  be  fairly  said  that  science  can  take  any 
legitimate  exception  to  such  a  statement  ?  The  progress 
of  man  which  anthropological  science  discloses  is  very 
broken,  very  partial ;  if  development  of  some  sort  is 
universal,  progress  is  very  rare,  distinct  deterioration  not 
uncommon.  Science,  like  poetry  and  philosophy,  must 
bear  witness  to  the  disappointing  element  in  human 
nature,  of  which  He  was  so  conscious  of  whom  it  is  said 
that  *  He  did  not  trust  himself  to  man,  because  he  needed 
not  that  any  one  should  bear  witness  concerning  man,  for 
he  himself  knew  what  was  in  man'— the  sad  secret  of 
human  untrustworthiness  and  unsatisfactoriness  ^. 

Again,  can  science  assert  that  this  actual  development 
of  man,  so  thwarted  and  tainted  and  partial,  has  been  the 
only  possible  development,  and  that  there  could  not  have 
been  a  better?     If  it  cannot  say  this,  there  is  in  the 

1  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  vi.  12.  96  ;  Iren.  c.  Haer,  iv.  38. 
^  See  also  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  78,  79. 


Note  E  223 


general  view  of  human  progress  and  deterioration  no 
antagonism  between  religion  and  science. 

II.— But  it  may  be  said,  'Science  certainly  does  say 
that  the  actual  development  of  man  has  been  the  only 
possible  development.  Science  excludes  the  idea  of  sin 
in  the  sense  of  something  which  need  not  have  happened, 
because  it  excludes  the  idea  of  freedom  or  contingency 
altogether.  Good  and  bad  characters  are  like  good  and 
bad  apples— mere  facts  of  natural  growth ' ;  or  more 
suggestively,  '  Sin  (so  called)  is  only  the  survival  of  brute 
instincts,  which,  from  a  higher  condition  of  evolution, 
men  have  come  to  be  ashamed  of.' 

It  cannot  be  made  too  emphatic  that  here  is  the  real 
battle-ground  of  rehgion  and  science  to-day,  though  the 
fact  is  often  concealed  in  popular  controversy.  I  do  not 
believe  there  is  any  real  difficulty  in  adjusting  sufficiently  the 
relations  of  religion  and  science  as  to  the  Fall  when  once  the 
idea  of  sin  has  been  admitted — that  is,  the  idea  of  free, 
responsible  action,  with  its  correlative,  the  possibility  of  ivrong 
action  luhich  might  have  been  avoided.  Christian  and  other 
teachers  have,  no  doubt,  often  failed  to  see  how  limited 
human  freedom  is,  but  they  have  never  been  wrong  in 
asserting  that  the  reality  of  freedom  within  limits  is 
essential  to  Christianity  and  morality.  Sin  is  not  a  mere 
fact  of  nature.  It  is  a  perversion  which  ought  not  to  have 
been.  This  subject  is  not  what  is  directly  before  us 
now ;  but  the  heart  of  the  controversy  is  here ;  and 
I  will  make  the  following  very  brief  remarks  upon  it. 

(i)  A  theory  that  cannot  be  put  into  practice,  or  a  theory 
that  cannot  account  for  the  facts,  is  a  false  or  at  least 
inadequate  theor}^  Now  the  theorj^  of  necessary  deter- 
minism cannot  be  put  into  practice.  To  believe  that  our 
own  conduct  is  not  really  under  our  own  control — that 
the  idea  of  responsibility  is  at  bottom  an  illusion — is 
to  destroy  the  basis  of  human  life  and  education.    Even 


224        ^^^  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

the  holders  of  the  theory  admit  that  it  must  be  kept  out 
of   sight  in  practice. 

Further,  it  is  a  theory  that  cannot  account  for  the 
facts— viz.  for  the  existence  of  the  universal  sense  of 
responsibility;  and  the  apphcation  to  human  action 
of  moral  blame  and  praise,  which  penetrates  the  whole  of 
thought  and  language,  and  which  holds  too  large  a  place 
in  human  life  to  be  a  delusion.  We  are  not  ashamed  of 
a  physical  accident,  but  we  are  ashamed  of  telHng  a  lie. 
And  this  difference  is  fundamental  and  based  on  reality. 

(2)  The  Christian  assumption  may  be  stated  as  follows: 
granted  that  we  cannot  increase  the  sum  of  force 
which  passes  from  external  sources  into  our  system,  and 
passes  out  again  in  manifold  forms  of  human  action,  yet 
within  certain  limits  we  can  direct  it  for  good  or  evil— i.e. 
the  'voluntary'  part  of  a  man's  action  may  be  determined 
from  below,  so  to  speak,  by  purely  animal  motives,  or  by 
rational  and  spiritual  motives.  In  the  latter  case,  the 
action  is  of  the  proper  human  quality,  and  stamps 
a  rational  and  spiritual  character  upon  all  that  falls 
within  its  range.  In  the  former  case,  it  may  be  truly 
regarded  as  a  survival  of  the  physical  instincts  of  animal 
progenitors,  and  no  doubt  it  emerges  as  a  part  of  the 
physical  order  of  the  world.  But,  considered  as  human 
action,  it  represents  a  lapse,  a  culpable  subordination  of 
the  higher  to  the  lower  in  our  nature,  a  violation  of  the 
law  proper  to  manhood  \  This  is  the  point.  St.  John 
says,  '  All  sin  is  lawlessness,'  and  (by  the  exact  form  of 
expression  which  he  uses)  he  implies  also  that  all 
lawlessness  is  sin.  Here,  and  here  only  where  voluntary 
action  begins,  do  you  see  violation  of  law,  and  therefore, 
within  limits,  a  disturbance  of  the  divine  order — some- 
thing which  ought  to  have  been  otherwise. 

On  the  meaning  of  ^  freedom  of  will,'  see  vol.  i.  pp.  230  ff. 


Note  E 


225 


(3)  The  belief  that  the  moral  evil  of  our  nature  does 
not  properly  belong  to  our  nature  but  is  its  violation,  and 
that  if  once  the  will  be  set  right  it  can  be  remedied,  has 
been  the  secret  of  the  moral  strength  of  Christianity. 
Christianity  has  said  to  all  men,  However  corrupted  your 
nature,  the  corruption  does  not  essentially  belong  to  you. 
Give  your  wills  to  God,  and,  if  slowl}^  3^et  surely,  if  not 
fully  in  this  world,  then  beyond  it,  all  can  be  set  right. 
'  According  to  thy  faith  be  it  unto  thee.'  And  the  practical 
power  of  this  appeal,  shows  its  agreement  with  reality. 

(4)  On  the  other  hand,  it  cannot  be  claimed  that  the 
theory  is  contrary  to  any  real  scientific  knowledge  \  for 
biolog3'  confesses  that  it  knows  very  little  as  to  the  actual 
methods  by  which  force  is  redistributedjn  human  action. 
It  is  contrary  only  to  some  large  and  unverifiable  assump- 
tions— assumptions  which  ignore  the  abstract  character  of 
biological  psychology,  as  of  other  sciences. 

Now  granted  this  reality  of  free  voluntary  action,  it 
will  hardl}^  be  denied  that  history  discloses  to  us 
a  practically  universal  prevalence  of  sin^,  in  the  present 
and  in  the  past ;  and  we  can  hardly  fail  to  perceive,  lying 
behind  actual  sins,  a  tendency  to  sin— what  Shelley  calls 
'  the  ineradicable  taint  of  sin,'  a  perverse  inclination 
inhering  in  the  stock  of  our  manhood,  which  is  what 
theology  calls  original  sin. 

III. — But  here  a  more  modern  objection  occurs. 
Christianity  assumes  that  this  moral  flaw  or  taint,  weak- 
ness or  grossness,  in  human  nature  is  the  outcome  of 
actual  transgressions,  in  other  words  that  original  sin 
is  due  to  actual  sin,  whereas  the  tendency  of  recent 
biological  science  is  to  deny  that  acquired  characters  can 
be  inherited,  and  therefore  to  deny  that  any  acts  of  any 
man  or  men  could  have  any  effect  on  the  congenital 
moral  nature  of  their  descendants ;  the  taint  or  fault  in 
^  See  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  80-1. 

II.  Q 


226        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


human  nature,  must  be  a  taint  or  fault  in  that  original 
substance  which  what  is  called  man  derived  from  his 
pre-human  ancestry.  To  this  I  reply  : — This  is  no  doubt 
the  view  which  Professor  Weismann  has  made  more  or 
less  prevalent.  The  substance  of  heredity  (^  germ-plasm ') 
is  taken  to  be  a  substance  per  se,  which  has  always 
occupied  a  special  'sphere'  of  its  own,  without  any 
contact  with  that  of  'somatoplasm'  further  than  is 
required  for  its  lodgement  or  nutrition  ;  hence  it  can 
never  be  in  any  degree  modified  as  to  its  hereditary 
qualities  by  use-inheritance.  It  has  been  absolutely 
continuous  '  since  the  first  origin  of  life.' 

But  this  doctrine  does  not  appear  yet  to  have  assumed 
a  fixed  form^;  and  in  its  extreme  or  absolute  form  it  is 
highly  disputable,  and  rejected  by  large  sections  of  bio- 
logists. Professor  Haeckel- declares  contemptuously  that 
he  should  feel  it  more  reasonable  to  accept  the  Mosaic 
account  of  special  creations !  The  late  Mr.  Romanes, 
after  summing  up  the  evidence  on  both  sides  without 
any  contempt,  decides :  *  No  one  is  thus  far  entitled 
to  conclude  against  the  possible  transmission  of  acquired 
characters^.'  Again,  'that  this  substance  of  heredity  is 
largely  continuous  and  highly  stable,  I  see  many  and 
cogent  reasons  for  believing.  But  that  this  substance 
has  been  uninterruptedly  continuous  since  the  origin  of 
life,  or  absolutely  stable  since  the  origin  of  sexual 
propagation,  I  see  even  more  and  better  reasons  for  dis- 
believing*.'   And  he  remarks^,  'I  doubt  not  Weismann 

^  Romanes,  Examination  of  IVeisntannism  (Longmans,  1893), 
pp.  61-70,  153. 

2  The  Last  Link  (Black,  1899},  p.  79. 

3  Romanes,  Danvin  and  after  Darwin  (Longmans,  1895},  ii. 
p.  279. 

*  Examination  of  IVeisntannism,  pp.  114,  115. 
^  Darwin  and  after  Darwin,  ii.  p.  90. 


Note  E  227 


himself  would  be  the  first  to  allow  that  his  theory  of 
heredity  encounters  greater  difficulties  in  the  domain 
of  ethics  than  in  any  other— unless  indeed,  it  be  that  of 
religion.' 

I  ought  to  add,  in  view  of  the  apparently  improbable 
event  of  the  doctrine  of  Weismann  becoming  in  its 
absolute  form  the  accepted  doctrine  of  biologists,  that 
of  course  it  only  concerns  the  material  organism.  No 
one  who  is  not  a  materialist  would  deny  the  possibility 
of  the  character  of  the  parent  modifying  at  its  very  root 
that  of  the  child,  without  even  the  smallest  conceivable 
modification  of  the  physical  organism ;  because  in  the 
origination  of  a  spiritual  personality,  and  in  the  link  which 
binds  it  to  the  antecedent  personalities  to  which  it  owes  its 
being,  there  is  that  which  lies  outside  the  purview  of 
biological  science.  There  may  be  an  inheritance  of  sinful 
tendencies  derived  from  sinful  acts  in  the  region  of  the 
spiritual  personality,  even  if  no  physical  transmission  is 
possible. 

However  it  be  explained,  it  appears  to  be  the  case 
that  Christianity  is  bound  to  maintain  the  position  that 
in  the  region  of  moral  character  there  is,  in  fact,  a  solidarity 
in  humanity.  We  are  bound  together.  Our  acts,  as  they 
form  our  own  character,  do  somehow  or  other,  however 
slightly,  modify  the  characters  of  our  descendants  for 
^ood  or  evil.  And  this  modification  of  the  tendencies  of 
the  race  by  the  acts  of  individuals  may  have  been  more 
marked  at  the  beginning  than  it  is  to-day. 

On  the  other  hand  Christianity  is  not  in  any  way 
interested  in  denjdng  that  man  derives  a  physical  heritage 
of  habits  and  tendencies  from  a  pre-human  ancestry.  All 
I  imagine  that  Christianity  is  interested  in  affirming  is 
this — that  when  the  animal  organism  became  the 
•dwelling-place  of  the  human  spirit  (so  to  speak)  that 
liuman  spirit  might  have  taken  one  of  two  courses.  It 
Q2 


228        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


might  have  followed  the  path  of  the  divine  will ;  and  in 
that  case  human  development  would  have  represented 
a  steady  and  gradual  spiritualizing  of  the  animal  nature 
reaching  on  towards  perfection.  It  might  have  taken, 
on  the  other  hand,  and  did  in  fact  take  (more  or  less),  the 
line  of  wilful  disobedience.  And  the  moral  effects  of 
this  wilfulness  and  disobedience  from  the  beginning 
onwards  have  been  felt  from  parent  to  son.  So  that  the 
springs  of  human  conduct  have  been  weakened  and 
perverted,  and  no  man  has  started  without  some  bias  in 
the  wrong  direction  which  would  not  have  been  there  if 
his  ancestors  for  many  generations  had  been  true  to  God. 

It  is  worth  noticing  in  passing  that  '  original  sin '  is  not 
a  fixed  quantity'  derived  from  one  lapse  of  the  original 
man,  but  is  a  moral  weakness  continually  reinforced  b}^ 
every  actual  transgression,  and,  on  the  other  hand^ 
reduced  in  force  by  moral  resistance  and  self-control. 
Individuals  start  at  very  different  levels  of  depravity. 
Only  it  would  appear  that  practically  in  no  man  but  One 
is  there  any  reason  to  believe  the  fundamental  nature 
immaculate. 

IV.— But  it  will  be.  said  'You  have  not  j'et  touched 
upon  a  big  central  contradiction  between  religion  and 
science.  According  to  the  Christian  doctrine  mankind  is 
derived  from  a  single  specificall}-  human  pair,  made 
human  by  a  special  inspiration  of  the  Divine  Spirit. 
According  to  the  theory  of  evolution,  a  certain  species 
of  apes  under  specially  favourable  conditions  gradually 
advanced  to  become  what  might  be  called  man,  though 
of  a  very  low  tj^pe.'  To  this  I  am  inclined  to  make  reply 
thus :  Christianitj'  is  reall}'  bound  up  with  maintaining 
four  positions— (i)  the  realitj^  of  moral  freedom ;  (2)  the 
fact  of  sin,  properly  so  called  as  distinct  from  imperfection ; 
(3)  its  practical  universality,  at  least  as  an  inherited 
tendency ;  and  (4)  the  unity  of  the  human  race  in  such 


Note  E  229 


sense  that  the  same  postulates  may  be  made  with  regard 
to  all  men,  and  the  same  capacity  for  moral  redemption 
(more  or  less)  assumed  to  be  in  them.  Now,  as  regards 
the  first  three  of  these  positions  enough  has  been  said 
already,  and  the  last  of  them  does  not  appear  to  be  at 
present  in  dispute  between  science  and  religion.  St.  Paul 
says,  '  God  made  of  one ''  (or  *  of  one  blood,'  for  this 
reading  is  possibly  right)  'every  nation  of  men'  (Acts 
xvii.  26).  And  of  one  blood,  if  not  of  one  individual,  all 
men  are,  according  to  the  present  conclusions  of  biological 
science.  A  recent  work  on  ethnology,  by  Mr.  Keane 
(Cambridge  Geographical  Series),  speaks  thus:— 'The 
hominidae  are  not  separately  evolved  in  an  absolute 
sense— i.e.  from  so  many  different  anthropoid  precursors, 
but  the  present  primary  divisions  are  separately  evolved 
from  so  many  different  pleistocene  precursors,  them- 
selves evolved  through  a  single  pliocene  prototype  from 
a  single  anthropoid  precursor  \' 

It  does  not  seem  to  me,  then,  that  Christianity  is  really 
bound  up  with  anything  more  than  the  unity  of  the 
human  race,  which  science  also  strongly  asserts.  But  to 
pass  from  these  positions,  which  may  be  regarded  as 
certain,  to  something  more  conjectural  (apart  from  any 
question  of  the  literary  character  of  Genesis  iii),  we  may 
argue  thus  :  Sin  is  a  fact  having  the  same  character 
universally  in  human  history,  though  the  sense  of  sin  has 
varied  greatly,  reaching  back  as  far  as  human  history 
extends.  This  would  lead  us  to  suppose  that  it  goes 
back  to  the  roots  of  the  race.     It  suggests  some  original 

^  See  also  in  Haeckel,  Last  Link,  p.  148 :  *  We  assume  the 
single  monophyletic  origin  of  mankind  at  one  place,  in  one  dis- 
trict ' ;  and  passages  cited  above,  vol.  i.  p.  196,  n.  i.  The  science 
of  comparative  religions  also  suggests  the  same  conclusion. 
Everywhere  common  underlying  religious  needs  and  tendencies 
appear.     Acts  xvii.  27  is  justified  by  a  comparison  of  religions. 


230        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 


fall,  some  tainting  of  the  race  in  its  origin.  I  do  not  see,, 
then,  anjthing  absurd  or  contrary  to  evidence  in  such 
a  hj'pothesis  as  this. — The  Divine  Spirit  is  assumed  to  be 
at  work  in  all  the  development  of  the  world.  The  '  laws 
of  nature '  are  but  His  methods.  At  a  certain  moment 
a  new  thing  had  emerged  in  the  universe  hitherto 
inorganic.  It  was  the  fact  of  life.  It  was  new\  But  it 
was  in  continuity  with  what  had  gone  before.  This 
principle  of  life  had  its  great  development,  vegetable 
and  animal.  It  had  attained  a  form  in  certain  anthropoid 
apes  such  as  we  are  familiar  with  in  men.  Suppose  then 
that  the  Divine  Spirit  breathes  Himself,  again  in  a  new 
way,  into  one  single  pair  or  group  of  these  anthropoid 
animals.  There  is  lodged  in  them  for  the  first  time 
a  germ  of  spiritual  consciousness,  continuous  with  animal 
intelligence,  and  3'et  distinct  from  it.  From  this  pair  or 
group  humanit}'  has  its  origin.  If  the}'  and  their  offspring 
had  been  true  to  their  spiritual  capacities  the  animal 
nature  would  have  been  more  rapidly'  spiritualized  in 
motives  and  tendencies.  Development— physical,  moral, 
spiritual— would  have  been  steady  and  glorious.  Whereas 
there  was  a  fall  at  the  very  root  of  our  humanity;  and  the 
fall  was  repeated  and  reiterated  and  renewed,  and  the 
development  of  our  manhood  was  tainted  and  spoiled. 
There  was  a  lapse  into  approximately  animal  condition, 
which  is  diml}'  known  to  us  as  primitive  savager}'.  So 
that  the  condition  of  savage  man  is  a  parody  of  what  God 
intended  man  in  his  undeveloped  stages  to  be,  just  as  the 
condition  of  civilized  man  in  London  and  Paris  is  a  parody 
of  what  God  intended  developed  man  to  come  to.  And 
there  have  been  long  and  drear}-  epochs  when  men  have 

^  It  must  not  be  left  out  of  sight  that  the  idea  of  life  as  naturally 
derived  from  what  was  inorganic,  has  not  yet  been  made  to  appear 
even  scientifically  probable,  in  view  of  the  evidence. 


Note  E  231 


seemed  to  lose  almost  all  human  ideals  and  divine 
aspirations  ;  when,  in  St.  Paul's  phrase,  they  were  '  alive 
without  the  law,'  living  a  physical  life  unvisited  by  the 
remorse  consequent  upon  any  knowledge  of  better  things. 
And  there  have  been,  on  the  other  hand,  epochs  and 
special  occasions  of  spiritual  opportunitj'  and  spiritual 
restorations.  And  so,  on  the  whole,  side  by  side  with 
the  continually  deteriorating  effect  of  sin,  has  gone  oh 
the  slow  process  of  redemption,  the  undoing  of  the  evil 
of  sin  and  the  realization  of  the  divine  purpose  for  man. 
Such  an  idea  of  human  history,  parti}'  onl}'  hypothetical, 
partly  assured,  conflicts  with  no  scientific  ethnolog}-,  and 
is  but  a  restatement  of  old-fashioned  Christianit}'  in  all 
that  has  religious  importance. 

v.— Of  course,  in  all  this  I  am  assuming  that  the  doctrine 
of  sin  and  of  the  P^all  in  its  true  importance  has  a  much 
securer  basis  than  the  supposition  that  Genesis  iii  is 
literal  histor}'.  The  doctrine  of  the  Fall  is,  as  I  have 
said,  not  separable  from  the  doctrine  of  sin,  or  the  doc- 
trine of  sin  from  that  of  moral  freedom.  It  rests  upon 
the  broad  basis  of  human  experience,  especially  upon 
Christian  experience,  which  is  bound  up  with  its  realit}-. 
Most  of  all  it  rests,  for  Christians,  on  the  teaching  of 
Christ.  For  Christ's  teaching  and  action  postulate 
throughout  the  doctrine  of  sin.  But  that  doctrine  in 
its  turn  goes  back  upon  the  Old  Testament,  which  is 
full  of  the  truth  that  the  evils  of  human  nature  are  due, 
not  to  its  essential  constitution,  but  to  man's  wilfulness 
and  its  results ;  that  the  disordering  force  in  human 
nature  has  been  moral,  the  force  of  sin ;  that  human 
history  represents  in  one  aspect  a  fall  from  a  divine 
purpose,  a  fall  constantly  reiterated  and  renewed  in  acts 
of  disobedience.  These  constant  acts  of  disobedience  are 
in  part  caused  by  an  evil  heart  in  human  nature,  and  this 
in  its  turn  exhibits  the  fruits  of  past  sins.     Granted  this, 


232        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

the  story  in  Genesis  iii,  whether  it  be  historical  or  whether 
(as  not  only  many  modern  Christians,  but  some  of  the 
greatest  of  early  Christians,  have  thought)  it  be  not  an 
historical  account  of  a  single  event,  but  a  generalized 
account  of  what  is  continually  happening,  has,  at  any 
rate,  vital  spiritual  truth.  The  character  of  its  inspiration 
is  apparent.  Teach  a  child  what  sin  is,  first  of  all  on  the 
ground  of  general  Christian  experience  and  the  teaching 
of  Christ,  and  then  read  to  it  the  story  of  Genesis  iii,  and 
the  child  must  perforce  recognize  the  truth  in  a  form  in 
which  it  cannot  be  forgotten.  There  in  that  story  all  the 
main  points  of  truth  as  to  the  meaning  of  sin  are  sug- 
gested, and  the  main  sources  of  error  precluded.  Sin 
is  not  our  nature,  but  wilfulness ;  sin  is  disobedience  to 
the  divine  law,  the  refusal  of  trust  in  God ;  there  is  such 
a  thing  as  being  tempted  to  sin,  and  yielding  to  it,  and 
then  finding  that  we  have  been  deceived,  being  con- 
science-stricken and  fearing  to  face  God ;  and  the  curse 
of  our  manhood  springs  from  nowhere  ultimately  but 
our  own  evil  heart.  And  if  our  sins  lay  us  under  an 
outward  discipline,  which  is  God's  punishment,  yet  in 
the  very]  disciphne  lies  the  hope  of  our  recovery.  God 
the  destroyer  is  also  the  God  who  promises  redemption. 
Thus  all  that  we  most  need  to  know  about  God  and  man, 
about  obedience  and  disobedience,  about  temptation,  about 
the  blessing  and  the  cursing  of  human  nature,  about  con- 
science good  and  bad,  is  to  be  found  in  the  story  of 
Genesis  iii,  written  in  language  suitable  to  the  childhood 
of  the  individual  and  of  the  race. 

VI.— But  once  more,  and  for  the  last  time,  the  biologist 
will  reply,  '  You  are  not  going  to  get  off  so  easily.  The 
fact  of  physical  death  is  inextricably  interwoven  into  the 
structural  growth  of  the  world  long  before  men  appeared. 
But  Christianity  regards  it  as  a  mere  consequence  of 
human  sin.'    This  is  not  the  case.    Long  before  science 


Note  E  233 


had  investigated  the  early  history  of  life  on  our  globe, 
Christian  teachers  both  in  East  and  in  West— St.  Augustine 
as  well  as  St.  Athanasius— had  taught  that  death  is  the 
law  of  physical  nature,  that  it  had  been  in  the  world 
before  man,  and  that  'man  was  by  nature  mortal,'  because, 
as  being  animal,  he  was  subject  to  death.  How,  then,  do 
they  interpret  the  language  of  Scripture  ?  In  this  way  : 
They  hold  that  if  man  had  been  true  to  his  spiritual 
nature,  the  supernatural  hfe,  the  life  in  God,  would  have 
blunted  the  forces  of  corruption,  and  lifted  him  into  a 
higher  and  immortal  state. 

Certainly,  in  some  sense,  death,  as  we  know  it,  for  man, 
is  regarded,  especially  in  the  New  Testament,  as  the 
penalty  of  sin.  But  then  what  do  we  mean  by  death  ? 
If  sin  is  said  to  have  introduced  human  death,  Christ  is 
constantly  said  to  have  abolished  it.  '  This  is  the  bread 
that  Cometh  down  from  heaven,  that  a  man  may  eat 
thereof  and  not  die.'  '  Whosoever  beheveth  on  me  shall 
never  die.'  'Christ  Jesus  aboHshed  death.'  Sin,  then, 
we  may  suppose,  only  introduced  death  in  some  sense 
such  as  that  in  which  Christ  abolished  it.  Christ  has  not 
abolished  the  physical  transition  from  this  world  to  the 
invisible  world,  but  He  has  robbed  it  of  its  terror,  its 
sting,  its  misery.  Apart  from  sin  we  may  suppose  man 
would  not  have  died  ;  that  is,  he  would  never  have  had 
that  horrible  experience  which  he  has  called  death.  There 
would  have  been  only  some  transition  full  of  a  glorious 
hope  from  one  state  of  being  to  another. 

We  are  again  in  the  region  of  conjecture.  All  that  I  am 
here  interested  in  asserting  is  that  Christianity  never  has 
held  to  the  position  that  human  sin  first  introduced  death 
into  the  ivorld.  What  it  has  taught  is  that  hiunan  death, 
as  men  have  known  it,  with  its  horror  and  its  misery,  has 
represented  not  God's  intention  for  man,  but  the  curse 
of  sin. 


234        I  li(^  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

VII. — Now  I  have  endeavoured  to  face  and  meet  the 
points  which  are  urged  in  the  name  of  science  against 
the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Fall.  I  have  endeavoured 
to  point  out  that  what  is  essential  to  Christianity  is  to 
believe  in  the  realit}'  of  moral  freedom,  and  the  conse- 
quent reaht}'  of  sin,  as  something  which  need  not  have 
been  in  the  individual,  or  in  the  race  considered  as  a 
unit}'.  This  is  all  that  Christianity  is  really  pledged  to- 
maintain.  In  maintaining  this  we  are  maintaining  what 
is  absolutel}^  essential  to  the  moral  well-being  of  the 
race,  and.  moreover,  what  has  the  deepest  roots  in  man's 
moral  experience  and  in  the  teaching  of  Christ.  In 
holding  this  we  hold  the  doctrine  of  the  Fall,  a  doctrine^ 
that  is,  that  man's  condition  has  been  throughout  a  parody 
of  the  divine  intention,  owing  to  the  fact  of  sin  tainting 
and  spoiling  his  development  from  the  root.  But  Chris- 
tianit}-  is  not  in  any  kind  of  way  pledged  against  the 
doctrine  of  development,  only  against  the  doctrine  which 
no  reasonable  science  can  hold,  that  the  actual  develop- 
ment of  man  has  been  the  best  or  only  possible  one. 
Nor,  I  have  urged,  can  it  be  reasonably  said  that  the 
Christian  doctrine  of  sin  and  of  the  Fall  is  bound  up  with 
one  particular  interpretation  of  Genesis  iii.  All,  then,  that 
we  must  admit  in  the  wa}' of  collision  between  Christianity 
and  science  is,  on  the  one  hand,  that  Christianity  is  not 
intended  to  teach  men  science,  and  that  when  there  is 
an}'  great  advance  in  human  knowledge  it  takes  a  little 
while  for  Christianity  to  extricate  itself  from  the  meshes 
of  the  language  and  ideas  belonging  to  one  stage  of 
scientific  knowledge,  and  to  assimilate  the  terms  and 
ideas  of  the  new.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is 
perennial  and  necessarj^  warfare  between  Christianity 
and  materiahstic  science,  or  a  science  which  denies  the 
reality  of  moral  freedom.  And  as  to  Christianity  giving 
up  what  is  proper  to  its  own  ground— its  teaching  about 


Note  E  235 


freedom  and  sin  and  the  Fall,  and  God's  purpose  for 
man,  and  the  love  shown  in  his  redemption— to  give  up 
this  is  to  give  up  what  is  the  best  and  deepest  motive  of 
human  progress,  and  what  is  most  surely  certificated 
by  the  witness  of  Christ  and  the  spiritual  experience  of 
Christendom.  Indeed  all  schemes  of  human  imprt^ve- 
ment  are  shallow  and  inadequate,  which  do  not  deal  with 
man  as  what,  in  fact,  he  has  been  proved  to  be,  a  sinful, 
that  is  a  fallen,  being,  needing  not  onl}^  education  but 
redemption. 

Before  leaving  this  attempt  to  show  that  there  is 
no  necessary  conflict  between  biological  and  theological 
science,  it  is  important  to  call  the  attention  of  the  intelli- 
gent public  to  the  fact  that  what  formerly  appeared  to  be 
the  solid  consistenc}'  of  the  '  Darwinian '  creed,  has  been 
broken  up  into  a  state  not  far  removed  from  chaos.  It 
has  become  apparent  how  very  little  wa}-  has  really  been 
made  towards  showing  what  have  been  the  actual  factors 
in  evolution— how  the  fact  of  evolution  through  variation 
has  actually  occurred.  Thus  Mr.  Bateson  ^  remarks,  '  If 
the  study  of  variation  can  serve  no  other  end,  it  may 
make  us  remember  that  the  complexity  of  the  problem 
of  specific  difference  is  hardly  less  now  than  it  was 
when  Darwin  first  showed  that  natural  history  is  a 
problem,  and  no  vain  riddle.'  What  is  the  cause  of 
variations  occurring  ?  What  law  do  they  exhibit  in 
their  occurrence  ?  Do  variations  occur  with  a  certain 
degree  of  sudden  completeness  ^P     Or  how  are  we  to 

^  W.  Bateson,  Materials  for  the  Study  of  Variations^  treated  with 
especial  regard  to  discoutimdiy  in  the  origin  of  species  (Macmillan,, 
1894;,  p.  xii. 

2  Biologists  are  now  apparent)}-  more  disposed  than  formerly 
to  admit  the  sudden  appearance  of  considerable  and  important 
modifications  and  rapid  developments.  Cf.  Haeckel,  I.e.  p.  144, 
and  Bateson,  p.  568.     He  concludes  that '  discontinuity  of  species 


236        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

explain  the  maintenance  of  variations,  which  in  a  more 
developed  stage  are  to  be  very  useful,  before  they  can 
be  shown  to  be  useful  at  all?  What  is  the  place  held 
in  evolution  by  *  natural  selection '  ?  What,  if  any,  the 
place  held  by  use-inheritance  ?  Is  the  factor  of '  mimicry,' 
supported  by  Darwin,  an  important  or  even  real  factor 
in  evolution  ?  What  is  to  be  the  issue  of  the  controversy 
between  the  biologist  and  the  physicist  on  the  question 
of  the  time  required  for  organic  development  ?  Are  we 
to  suppose  that  organic  development  at  the  beginning 
proceeded  very  much  more  rapidly  than  at  a  later  stage  ? 
Or  even  that  it  exhibited  laws  of  which  we  have  no 
experience  now,  such  as  would  admit  of  a  *  natural' 
development  of  life  out  of  what  is  not  living  ?  All  these, 
and  many  more  questions,  appear  to  be  so  completely 
open  that,  granted  the  general  theory  of  continuous 
evolution  as  against  special  creation,  hardly  anything 
as  regards  the  factors  or  causes  of  evolution  can  be  said 
to  be  scientifically  settled.  Thus  on  such  subjects  as  the 
origin  of  the  human  race,  its  exact  relation  to  an  animal 
ancestry,  and  the  right  interpretation  of  the  fact  of  sin, 

results  from  discontinuity  of  variation.'  'The  existence,'  he  says, 
*  of  sudden  and  discontinuous  variation,  the  existence,  that  is  to 
say,  of  new  forms  having  from  their  first  beginning  more  or  less 
of  the  kind  of  perfection  which  we  associate  with  normality,  is 
a  fact  that  disposes,  once  and  for  all,  of  the  attempt  to  interpret 
all  perfection  and  definiteness  of  form  as  the  work  of  selection. 
The  study  of  variation  leads  us  into  the  presence  of  whole  classes 
of  phenomena  that  are  plainly  incapable  of  such  interpretation.' 
This  relative  perfection  of  variations  at  starting  Mr.  Bateson 
attributes  in  great  measure  to  the  principle  of  '  symmetry/  or 
'  repetition  of  parts  '  in  living  things.  An  organism  is  symmetri- 
cal, and  thus  what  happens  in  one  of  many  similar  organs  repeats 
itself  normally  in  all  the  others.  Change  in  one  part  is  not  an 
isolated  fact,  but  there  is  'similarity  and  simultaneity  of  change.' 


Note  F  237 


before  science  can   make   demands   on   theolog}',  there 
must  be  more  agreement  in  her  own  camp. 


Note  F.     See  vol.  i.  p.  215. 

Baptism  by  Immersion  and  by  Affusion. 

The  following  passage  in  the  Didache,  c.  7,  is  of  the 
plainest  importance  for  the  history  of  this  matter:  'If 
thou  have  not  living  [i.e.  running]  water,  baptize  into 
other  water  ;  and  if  thou  canst  not  in  cold,  then  in  warm. 
And  if  thou  have  not  either  [in  sufficient  amount  for 
baptism,  i.e.  immersion  in  the  water]  pour  forth  water 
thrice  upon  the  head  into  the  name  of  Father  and  Son 
and  Holy  Ghost.'  Cf.  Dr.  Taylor,  Teaching  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles  (Cambridge,  1886),  p.  52  :  '  The  primitive  mode 
of  baptism  was  b}^  immersion.  According  to  the  Jewish 
rite  a  ring  on  the  finger,  a  band  confining  the  hair, 
or  anything  that  in  the  least  degree  broke  the  con- 
tinuity of  contact  with  the  water,  was  held  to  invalidate 
the  act.  The  Greek  word  "baptize,"  like  the  Hebrew 
tabol,  means  to  dip :  to  "  baptize  "  a  ship  is  to  sink  it. 
The  construction  [in  the  above  passage  of  the  Didache] 
"baptize  into  other  w^ater,"  points  to  immersion,  as 
likewise  does  Hermas,  when  he  writes  {Simil.  9) : 
"  The}'  go  down  therefore  into  the  water  dead,  and 
come  up  living ;  "  and  Barnabas  (chap,  xi) :  **  Herein  he 
saith  that  we  go  down  into  the  water  laden  with  sins  and 
filthiness,  and  come  up  bearing  fruit  in  our  heart,  and 
having  our  fear  and  our  hope  towards  Jesus  in  the 
Spirit."  This  was  still  the  normal  way  of  administering 
the  rite,  but  it  was  no  longer  insisted  upon  as  necessary ; 


238        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

*' Jf  thou  have  not  either^''''  not  enough  of  "living"  or 
"  other"  water  for  immersion,  ''pour  ivaiey  thrice  upon  the 
Jieadr  &c: 


Note  G,     See  vol.  ii.  p.  136. 
A  Prayer  of  Jeremy  Taylor. 

O  holy  and  ahnighty  God,  Father  of  mercies,  Father 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  Thy  love  and  eternal 
mercies,  I  adore  and  praise  and  glorify  Thy  infinite  and 
imspeakable  love  and  wisdom ;  who  hast  sent  Thy  Son 
from  the  bosom  of  felicities  to  take  upon  Him  our  nature 
and  our  misery  and  our  guilt,  and  hast  made  the  Son 
of  God  to  become  the  Son  of  Man,  that  we  might  become 
the  sons  of  God  and  partakers  of  the  divine  nature;  since 
Thou  hast  so  exalted  human  nature  be  pleased  also  to 
sanctify  my  person,  that  by  a  conformity  to  the  humility 
and  laws  and  sufferings  of  my  dearest  Saviour  I  may  be 
united  to  His  Spirit,  and  be  made  all  one  with  the  most 
holy  Jesus.    Amen. 

O  holy  and  eternal  Jesus,  who  didst  pity  mankind 
lying  in  his  blood  and  sin  and  misery,  and  didst  choose 
our  sadnesses  and  sorrows  that  Thou  nn'ghtest  make  us 
to  partake  of  Thy  felicities ;  Let  Thine  eyes  pity  me.  Thy 
hands  support  me.  Thy  holy  feet  tread  down  all  the  diffi- 
culties in  my  way  to  heaven ;  let  me  dwell  in  Thy  heart, 
be  instructed  with  Thy  wisdom,  moved  by  Thy  affections, 
■choose  with  Thy  will,  and  be  clothed  with  Thy  righteous- 
ness; that  in  the  day  of  judgement  I  may  be  found  having 
on  Thy  garments,  sealed  with  Thy  impression  ;  and  that, 
bearing  upon  every  faculty  and  member  the  character  of 


Note  H  239 


my  elder  Brother,  I  may  not  be  cast  out  with  strangers 
and  unbelievers.    Amen. 

O  holy  and  ever  blessed  Spirit,  who  didst  overshadow 
the  Holy  Virgin-mother  of  our  Lord,  and  caused  her  to 
conceive  by  a  miraculous  and  mysterious  manner  ;  be 
pleased  to  overshadow  my  soul,  and  enlighten  my  spirit, 
that  I  may  conceive  the  holy  Jesus  in  my  heart,  and  may 
bear  Him  in  my  mind,  and  may  grow  up  to  the  fullness  of 
the  stature  of  Christ,  to  be  a  perfect  man  in  Christ  Jesus. 
Amen. 

To  God,  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  to  the 
eternal  Son  that  was  incarnate  and  born  of  a  virgin  ;  to 
the  Spirit  of  the  Father  and  the  Son,  be  all  honour  and 
glory,  worship  and  adoration,  now  and  for  ever.  Amen. 
— Jeremy  Tajior,  Holy  Living-,  see  his  Works,  vol.  iii. 
p.  238. 


Note  H.     See  vol.  ii.  p.  147. 

The  Origin  of  the  Maxim — *  L\  necessariis  unitas,  etc' 

The  expression '  In  necessariis  unitas,  in  non  necessariis 
libertas,  in  omnibus  caritas '  is  cited  by  Richard  Baxter 
in  the  dedication  of  0«  the  True  ami  Only  Way  of  Concord  of 
all  Christian  Churches,  1679,  thus,  *  I  once  more  quote  you 
the  pacificator's  old  and  despised  words.'  But  the  pacifi- 
cator appears  to  be  no  one  older  than  a  Protestant  who 
wrote  (1620  to  1640),  under  the  name  of  Rupertus  Melden- 
ius,  a  Paraenesis  votiva  pro  pace  ecclesiae  ad  theologos 
Aiigustanae  Confessionis.  In  the  Paraenesis  occurs  the 
sentence  *si  nos  servaremus  in  necessariis  unitatem,  in  non 
necessariis  libertatem,  in  utrisque  caritatem  optimo  certe 
loco  essent  res  nostrae.'  See  A.  P.  Stanley  in  Macinillan^ 


240        The  Epistle  to  the  Romans 

Sep.,  1875,  referring  to  G.  C.  F.  Liicke,  Ueher  das  Alter, 
den  Verfasser,  die  itrspri'mgliche  Form  iind  den  wahrett  Sinn 
des  kirchlichen  Friedensspruchs :  '  in  necessariis  unitas  &c.,' 
Gottingen,  1850. 

This  information  was  supplied  me  in  correction  of  a 
mistaken  attribution  of  the  sajdng  of  which  I  was  guilty 
in  a  sermon  ;  and  has  been  verified  for  me  by  Mr.  Arthur 
Hirtzel.  The  saying  has  been  commonly  attributed 
to  St.  Augustine,  and  indeed  the  matter  of  it  is  thoroughly 
in  his  spirit ;  cf.  my  Ep/iesians,  p.  272 ;  and  see  also  De 
Gen.  ad  lift.,  viii.  5  :  '  Melius  est  dubitare  de  occultis  quam 
litigare  de  incertis.*  De  Civ.  Dei,  xix.  18  :  *  qua  [i.  e.  faith 
in  scripture]  salva  atque  certa,  de  quibusdam  rebus  quas 
neque  sensu,  neque  ratione  percepimus,  neque  nobis 
per  Scripturam  canonicam  claruerunt,  nee  per  testes,  qui- 
bus  non  credere  absurdum  est,  in  nostram  notitiam  per- 
venerunt,  sine  iusta  reprehensione  dubitamus.' 


Note  I.    See  vol.  ii.  p.  179. 

St.  Augustine's  teaching  that  'the  Church  is  the 
BODY  OF  Christ  offered  in  the  eucharist.' 

The  following  passages  are  full  of  interest  :—De  Civ.  D, 
X.  6  :  'So  that  the  whole  redeemed  city,  that  is  the  con- 
gregation and  society  of  the  saints,  is  offered  as  a  universal 
sacrifice  to  God  by  the  High  Priest,  who  offered  nothing^ 
less  than  Himself  in  suffering  for  us,  so  that  we  might 
become  the  body  of  so  glorious  a  head,  according  to  that 
'  form  of  a  servant '  which  He  had  taken.  For  it  was  this- 
(our  human  nature)  that  He  offered,  in  this  that  He  was 
offered,  because  it  is  in  respect  of  this  that  He  is  mediator,, 
priest  and  sacrifice.'    Then  after  a  reference  to  Rom.  xii» 


Note  I  241 


1-6  he  continues,  '  This  is  the  Christian  sacrifice :  the 
"  many  "  become  "  one  body  in  Christ."  And  it  is  this 
that  the  Church  celebrates  by  means  of  the  sacrament  of 
the  altar,  famihar  to  the  faithful,  where  it  is  shown  to  her 
that  in  what  she  offers  she  herself  is  offered.'  And  x.  20 : 
Of  Christ's  perfect  sacrifice  of  Himself  '  He  willed  the 
Church's  sacrifice  to  be  a  daily  sacrament.  For  as  she  is 
the  body  of  Him  the  head,  she  learns  through  Him  to 
offer  up  herself.'  Again  xix.  23  :  '  God's  most  glorious  and 
best  sacrifice  is  we  ourselves,  that  is  His  city,  of  which 
we  celebrate  the  mysterj'-  in  our  oblations,  which  are 
known  to  the  faithful.'  Cf.  xxii.  10  :  '  The  sacrifice  itself 
is  the  body  of  Christ,  which  is  not  offered  to  them  (the 
martyrs),  for  they  themselves  also  are  it '  (quia  hoc  sunt 
et  ipsi).  Cf.  Serm.  227 :  'If  you  have  well  received  (the 
body  of  Christ  in  the  sacrament)  you  are  what  you  have 
received  .  . .  He  willed  us  to  be  His  sacrifice.' 

In  all  this  we  have  a  ver}'  plain  and  much  forgotten 
teaching.  But  we  must  not  misunderstand  St.  Augustine's 
use  of  apparently'  exclusive  language — as  if  the  sacrifice 
of  ourselves  was  the  only  sacrifice  offered  in  the  eucha- 
rist.  The  sacrifice  of  the  Church  is  offered  up  through 
Christ.  Thus  he  also  speaks  of  the  celebration  of  the 
eucharist  (on  the  occasion  of  his  mother  s  death,  Conf. 
ix.  12)  in  the  phrase  '  the  sacrifice  of  our  ransom  (pretii 
nostri)  was  offered  for  her.' 

We  do  well  to  remember  by  the  way  that  in  De  Civ. 
x.  5,  6,  St.  Augustine  twice  over  defines  what  he  means 
by  sacrifice  thus  :  *  A  true  sacrifice  is  everything  that  is 
done  in  order  that  we  may  by  a  holy  fellowship  inhere 
in  God.' 


II. 


OXFORD ;     HORACE    HART 
PRINTER    TO    THE    UNIVERSITY 


Date  Due 


!M  1  5  mi 


